Individual legislator voting records for this vote are not currently available. Includes all politicians who were in office at any point during the 2011-2012 Legislature.

AB 2073 - An Act to Amend Section 1010.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Relating to Civil Actions.

Courts: electronic filing and service of documents. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
Existing law authorizes a trial court to adopt local rules permitting electronic filing and service of documents, subject to rules adopted by the Judicial Council and other specified conditions. Existing law also authorizes the court, in any action in which a party has agreed to accept electronic service, or in which the court has ordered electronic service, as specified, to electronically serve… More
Existing law authorizes a trial court to adopt local rules permitting electronic filing and service of documents, subject to rules adopted by the Judicial Council and other specified conditions. Existing law also authorizes the court, in any action in which a party has agreed to accept electronic service, or in which the court has ordered electronic service, as specified, to electronically serve any document issued by the court that is not required to be personally served, in the same manner that parties electronically serve documents.

This bill would authorize the Orange County Superior Court, until July 1, 2014, to establish a pilot project to require parties to eligible civil actions, as specified, to electronically file and serve documents, subject to rules adopted by the Judicial Council and other specified conditions. The bill would require the Judicial Council to conduct an evaluation of any pilot project established pursuant to that provision and report to the Legislature on or before December 31, 2013, on the results of the evaluation. The bill would also require the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules to permit mandatory electronic filing and service of documents in eligible civil actions on or before July 1, 2014. The bill would authorize a superior court to require mandatory electronic filing, as specified, upon the adoption of those uniform rules by the Judicial Council. Hide
 
Status:
The bill has become law (chaptered). 
Assembly Vote: On Passage

PASSED on August 27, 2012.

voted YES: 80 voted NO: 0
0 voted present/not voting

An Act to Amend Section 1010.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Relating to Civil Actions.

AB 2073 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
Existing law authorizes a trial court to adopt local rules permitting electronic filing and service of documents, subject to rules adopted by the Judicial Council and other specified conditions. Existing law also authorizes the court, in any action in which a party has agreed to accept electronic service, or in which the court has ordered electronic service, as specified, to electronically serve any document issued by the court that is not required to be personally served, in the same manner that parties electronically serve documents.

This bill would authorize the Orange County Superior Court, until July 1, 2014, to establish a pilot project to require parties to eligible civil actions, as specified, to electronically file and serve documents, subject to rules adopted by the Judicial Council and other specified conditions. The bill would require the Judicial Council to conduct an evaluation of any pilot project established pursuant to that provision and report to the Legislature on or before December 31, 2013, on the results of the evaluation. The bill would also require the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules to permit mandatory electronic filing and service of… More
Existing law authorizes a trial court to adopt local rules permitting electronic filing and service of documents, subject to rules adopted by the Judicial Council and other specified conditions. Existing law also authorizes the court, in any action in which a party has agreed to accept electronic service, or in which the court has ordered electronic service, as specified, to electronically serve any document issued by the court that is not required to be personally served, in the same manner that parties electronically serve documents.

This bill would authorize the Orange County Superior Court, until July 1, 2014, to establish a pilot project to require parties to eligible civil actions, as specified, to electronically file and serve documents, subject to rules adopted by the Judicial Council and other specified conditions. The bill would require the Judicial Council to conduct an evaluation of any pilot project established pursuant to that provision and report to the Legislature on or before December 31, 2013, on the results of the evaluation. The bill would also require the Judicial Council to adopt uniform rules to permit mandatory electronic filing and service of documents in eligible civil actions on or before July 1, 2014. The bill would authorize a superior court to require mandatory electronic filing, as specified, upon the adoption of those uniform rules by the Judicial Council. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Amend Section 1010.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Relating to Civil Actions.
Author(s)
Jim Silva
Co-Authors
    Subjects
    • Courts: electronic filing and service of documents
    Major Actions
    Introduced2/23/2012
    Referred to Committee
    Passed Assembly Committee on Judiciary4/24/2012
    Passed Assembly Committee on Appropriations5/16/2012
    Passed Assembly5/25/2012
    Passed Senate Committee on Judiciary6/19/2012
    Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations8/06/2012
    Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations8/16/2012
    Passed Senate8/22/2012
    Passed Assembly8/27/2012
    Presented to the governor (enrolled)9/06/2012
    Became law (chaptered).9/14/2012
    Bill History
    Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
    select this voteAssembly Committee on JudiciaryDo pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.4/24/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Judiciary
    10 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssembly Committee on AppropriationsDo pass, to Consent Calendar.5/16/2012This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Appropriations
    17 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteAssemblyAB 2073 SILVA Consent Calendar Second Day Regular Session5/25/2012This bill PASSED the Assembly
    70 voted YES 0 voted NO 10 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on JudiciaryDo pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.6/19/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Judiciary
    5 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsPlaced on Appropriations Suspense file.8/06/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
    7 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsDo pass as amended.8/16/2012This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
    7 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    select this voteSenateAssembly 3rd Reading AB2073 Silva By Harman8/22/2012This bill PASSED the Senate
    35 voted YES 0 voted NO 5 voted present/not voting
    currently selectedAssemblyAB 2073 SILVA Concurrence in Senate Amendments8/27/2012This bill PASSED the Assembly
    80 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
    ActionDateDescription
    Introduced2/23/2012
    2/23/2012Read first time. To print.
    2/24/2012From printer. May be heard in committee March 25.
    3/08/2012Referred to Com. on JUD.
    4/10/2012In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
    select this voteVote4/24/2012Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
    4/26/2012From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 24).
    4/30/2012Read second time and amended.
    5/01/2012Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
    select this voteVote5/16/2012Do pass, to Consent Calendar.
    5/16/2012From committee: Do pass. To consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 16).
    5/17/2012Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.
    5/25/2012Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 70. Noes 0. Page 4985.)
    5/25/2012In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
    select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage5/25/2012AB 2073 SILVA Consent Calendar Second Day Regular Session
    6/07/2012Referred to Com. on JUD.
    select this voteVote6/19/2012Do pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.
    6/25/2012From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 19).
    6/26/2012Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
    8/06/2012In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
    select this voteVote8/06/2012Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.
    select this voteVote8/16/2012Do pass as amended.
    8/20/2012From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 16).
    8/21/2012Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
    8/22/2012Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 35. Noes 0. Page 4707.).
    8/22/2012In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 24 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
    select this voteSenate Vote on Passage8/22/2012Assembly 3rd Reading AB2073 Silva By Harman
    8/27/2012Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 80. Noes 0. Page 6312.).
    currently selectedAssembly Vote on Passage8/27/2012AB 2073 SILVA Concurrence in Senate Amendments
    9/06/2012Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 5:45 p.m.
    9/14/2012Approved by the Governor.
    9/14/2012Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 320, Statutes of 2012.

    MapLight did not identify any interest groups that took a position on this vote.
    You may be able to explore campaign contributions data if you add interest groups.
    Help your colleagues by suggesting an organization that took a position on this vote.

    0 Organizations Supported and 0 Opposed

    Organizations that took a position on
    An Act to Amend Section 1010.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Relating to Civil Actions.: AB 2073 SILVA Concurrence in Senate Amendments

    0 organizations supported this bill

    0 organizations opposed this bill

    Need proof?

    View citations of support and opposition

    Anything missing?

    Help your colleagues by suggesting an organization that took a position on this vote.
    How do you know they have this position? Please include a link to a newspaper article, organization's website, or other source.
    We will use it only to contact you about this form. Your address will never appear on this site.

    MapLight editors may add this organization after checking the sources you listed above. Thank you for helping to improve our site.

    Cancel
    Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Assemblymembers in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, May 20, 2010 – May 19, 2012.
    Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

    Add Data Filters:

    Legislator Filters
    Legislator Filters
    Show All
    NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
    That Supported
    $ From Interest Groups
    That Opposed
    Vote
    Katcho AchadjianRCA-33$0$0
    Luis AlejoDCA-28$0$0
    Michael AllenDCA-7$0$0
    Tom AmmianoDCA-13$0$0
    Toni AtkinsDCA-76$0$0
    Jim BeallDCA-24$0$0
    Bill BerryhillRCA-26$0$0
    Marty BlockDCA-78$0$0
    Bob BlumenfieldDCA-40$0$0
    Susan BonillaDCA-11$0$0
    Steven BradfordDCA-51$0$0
    Julia BrownleyDCA-41$0$0
    Joan BuchananDCA-15$0$0
    Betsy ButlerDCA-53$0$0
    Charles CalderonDCA-58$0$0
    Nora CamposDCA-23$0$0
    Wilmer Amina CarterDCA-62$0$0
    Gilbert CedilloDCA-45$0$0
    Wesley ChesbroDCA-1$0$0
    Connie ConwayRCA-34$0$0
    Paul CookRCA-65$0$0
    Mike DavisDCA-48$0$0
    Roger DickinsonDCA-9$0$0
    Tim DonnellyRCA-59$0$0
    Mike EngDCA-49$0$0
    Mike FeuerDCA-42$0$0
    Nathan FletcherRCA-75$0$0
    Paul FongDCA-22$0$0
    Felipe FuentesDCA-39$0$0
    Warren FurutaniDCA-55$0$0
    Beth GainesRCA-4$0$0
    Cathleen GalgianiDCA-17$0$0
    Martin GarrickRCA-74$0$0
    Mike GattoDCA-43$0$0
    Rich GordonDCA-21$0$0
    Jeff GorellRCA-37$0$0
    Shannon GroveRCA-32$0$0
    Curt HagmanRCA-60$0$0
    Linda HaldermanRCA-29$0$0
    Isadore HallDCA-52$0$0
    Diane HarkeyRCA-73$0$0
    Mary HayashiDCA-18$0$0
    Roger HernandezDCA-57$0$0
    Jerry HillDCA-19$0$0
    Alyson HuberDCA-10$0$0
    Ben HuesoDCA-79$0$0
    Jared HuffmanDCA-6$0$0
    Kevin JeffriesRCA-66$0$0
    Brian JonesRCA-77$0$0
    Steve KnightRCA-36$0$0
    Ricardo LaraDCA-50$0$0
    Dan LogueRCA-3$0$0
    Bonnie LowenthalDCA-54$0$0
    Fiona MaDCA-12$0$0
    Allan MansoorRCA-68$0$0
    Tony MendozaDCA-56$0$0
    Jeff MillerRCA-71$0$0
    Holly MitchellDCA-47$0$0
    Bill MonningDCA-27$0$0
    Mike MorrellRCA-63$0$0
    Brian NestandeRCA-64$0$0
    Jim NielsenRCA-2$0$0
    Chris NorbyRCA-72$0$0
    Kristin OlsenRCA-25$0$0
    Richard PanDCA-5$0$0
    Henry PereaDCA-31$0$0
    John PerezDCA-46$0$0
    Manuel PerezDCA-80$0$0
    Anthony PortantinoDCA-44$0$0
    Jim SilvaRCA-67$0$0
    Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$0$0
    Cameron SmythRCA-38$0$0
    Jose SolorioDCA-69$0$0
    Sandre SwansonDCA-16$0$0
    Norma TorresDCA-61$0$0
    David ValadaoRCA-30$0$0
    Don WagnerRCA-70$0$0
    Bob WieckowskiDCA-20$0$0
    Das WilliamsDCA-35$0$0
    Mariko YamadaDCA-8$0$0

    Interest Groups that supported this bill

    $ Donated

    Interest Groups that opposed this bill

    $ Donated
    Loading…
    Date Range of Contributions
    Enter a custom date range