Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Today, the California Code of Civil Procedure is comprehensive only with regard to trial court procedure. As a result of a bill pushed through the legislature at the suggestion of Chief Justice Phil S. Gibson in 1941, appellate procedure in California is governed primarily by the California Rules of Court (specifically, Title 8, Appellate Rules).
Rule 65 governs the procedure on applications for preliminary injunctions and temporary restraining orders. Rule 65.1 addresses security and suretyship issues arising when the court orders a party to deposit security such as a bond. Rule 66 deals with receivership. Rule 67 deals with funds deposited in court, such as in interpleader actions.
The Judicial Council of California has also promulgated the California Rules of Court, which includes such publications as the Standards of Judicial Administration and the Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitrations, under the authority of article VI, section 6, of the Constitution of California.
In 1941, the Puerto Rican Legislative Assembly joined the nationwide movement towards transferring civil procedure and evidentiary law into a system of rules promulgated by the courts, then abolished the judicial power to promulgate rules in 1946, then reinstated it in 1952 (subject to the right of the legislature to amend court rules before ...
In California law, when a case goes up on writ of mandate (California's version of mandamus), the appellant goes first in the case caption on appeal as the petitioner, and the superior court becomes the respondent. The actual opponent is listed below those names as the "real party in interest."
On May 10, 2018, the Supreme Court of California entered an administrative order on the 70 proposed rules which approved 27 rules in full, approved 42 rules with modifications, and rejected only one rule. [49] The rules took effect on November 1, 2018. [50] The new California rules are numbered so as to closely map to their MRPC analogues. [3]
The Judicial Council of California is the rule-making arm of the California court system. [1] In accordance with the California Constitution and under the leadership of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of California, the council is responsible for "ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial, and accessible administration of justice."
Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (1965), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, by a 6–2 vote, that it is a violation of a defendant's Fifth Amendment rights for the prosecutor to comment to the jury on the defendant's declining to testify, or for the judge to instruct the jury that such silence is evidence of guilt.