California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 5 — Civil discovery: Electronic Discovery Act.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 5, Statutes of 2009.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  4. ✓
    Passed Senate
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced December 01, 2008. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 78% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 5 sponsors

    1 primary, 4 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 4 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

The Civil Discovery Act permits a party to a civil action to obtain discovery, as specified, by inspecting documents, tangible things, and land or other property in the possession of any other party to the action. Existing law requires the party to whom an inspection demand has been directed to respond separately to each item or category of item by any of certain responses, including a statement that the party will comply with the particular demand for inspection by the date set for inspection pursuant to a specified provision. This bill would establish procedures for a person to obtain discovery of electronically stored information, as defined, in addition to documents, tangible things, and land or other property, in the possession of any other party to the action. This bill would permit discovery by the means of copying, testing, or sampling, in addition to inspection, of documents, tangible things, land or other property, or electronically stored information. The Civil Discovery Act permits the party demanding inspection and the responding party to agree to extend the time for service of a response to a set of inspection demands, or to particular items or categories of items in a set, to a date beyond that provided in a specified provision. This bill would permit the parties to agree to extend the date for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling beyond those provided in specified provisions. The Civil Discovery Act requires any documents produced in response to an inspection demand to be produced as they are kept in the usual course of business, or be organized and labeled to correspond with the categories in the demand. The documents are to be produced on the date described above or as agreed to by the parties pursuant to an extension. This bill would make this provision applicable, in addition, to documents produced in response to a demand for copying, testing, or sampling. The bill would furthermore provide that if a party responding to a demand for production of electronically stored information objects to a specified form for producing the information, or if no form is specified in the demand, the responding party shall state in its response the form in which it intends to produce each type of information. In general if a demand for production does not specify a form or forms for producing a type of electronically stored information, the responding party would be required to produce the information in the form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a form that is reasonably usable, but need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. The bill would also provide that a party seeking a protective order regarding, or a party objecting to or opposing a demand for, production, inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of electronically stored information, on the basis that the information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of the undue burden or expense shall bear the burden of demonstrating that the information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or expense. If it is established that the electronically stored information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or expense, the court may nonetheless order discovery if the demanding party shows good cause, subject to specified restrictions in specified circumstances. Existing law requires the court to impose a monetary sanction, as specified, against any party or any attorney of a party for specified violations. This bill would generally provide that, notwithstanding the above provision, the court shall not impose sanctions on a party or any attorney of a party for failure to provide electronically stored information that has been lost, damaged, altered, or overwritten as the result of the routine, good faith operation of an electronic information system. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 5, Statutes of 2009.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and to the Governor at 10:30 a.m.

  4. In Assembly. To enrollment.

  5. Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed and to Assembly. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 1296.)

  6. Read second time. To Consent Calendar.

  7. From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (June 9).

  8. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  9. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  10. Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed and to Senate. (Ayes 74. Noes 0. Page 558.)

  11. Read second time. To Consent Calendar.

  12. From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (March 3).

  13. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  14. From printer. May be heard in committee January 1.

  15. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Corbett · Cosponsor
  • Evans · Primary
  • Feuer · Cosponsor
  • Harman · Cosponsor
  • Tran · Cosponsor

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 4 co-sponsors · 117 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Evans

Co-sponsors (4)

  • Corbett
  • Feuer
  • Harman
  • Tran

Not signed on (117)

117 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 117 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Consent Calendar 2nd AB5 Evans

Passed 37 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 34004
Democratic 2000
Republican 1000
Total 37004
% of votes cast 90%0%0%10%
How each member voted (41)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Florez — Yea
Harman — Yea
Hollingsworth — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Negrete — Yea
Runner — Not Voting
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
McLeod — Yea
Oropeza — Not Voting
Pavley — Yea
Price — Yea
Romero — Not Voting
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Ashburn — Yea
Benoit — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Correa — Yea
Ducheny — Yea
Dutton — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wiggins — Yea
Aanestad — Yea
Huff — Yea
Maldonado — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Not Voting
Cogdill — Yea
Cox — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

AB 5 EVANS Consent Calendar Second Day

Passed 84 Yea · 0 Nay · 8 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 76008
Democratic 5000
Republican 3000
Total 84008
% of votes cast 91%0%0%9%
How each member voted (92)
Member Party Vote
Hagman — Yea
Carter — Yea
Bill — Yea
Berryhill — Yea
Tom — Yea
Berryhill — Yea
Charles — Yea
Anderson — Yea
Blakeslee — Yea
Evans — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Fuller — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Gaines — Yea
Bonnie — Yea
V. — Yea
Manuel — Yea
Perez — Yea
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Salas — Yea
Saldana — Yea
Audra — Yea
De — Not Voting
La — Not Voting
Torre — Not Voting
Gilmore — Yea
Hall — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Conway — Yea
Coto — Yea
Duvall — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Hernandez — Not Voting
Hill — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Krekorian — Yea
Lieu — Not Voting
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nava — Yea
Price — Not Voting
Ruskin — Not Voting
Silva — Yea
Smyth — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torlakson — Not Voting
Torres — Yea
Tran — Yea
Villines — Yea
Adams — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Bass — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Huber — Yea
Knight — Yea
Logue — Yea
Ma — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Torrico — Yea
Cook — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
Eng — Yea
Davis — Yea
DeVore — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass, to Consent Calendar.

Passed 10 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 1000
Unaffiliated 9000
Total 10000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (10)
Member Party Vote
Lieu — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Tran — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Knight — Yea
Krekorian — Yea
Monning — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Evans — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

civil-rights technology
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 5 do?
The Civil Discovery Act permits a party to a civil action to obtain discovery, as specified, by inspecting documents, tangible things, and land or other property in the possession of any other party to the action. Existing law requires the party to whom an inspection demand has been directed to respond separately to each item or category of item by any of certain responses, including a statement that the party will comply with the particular demand for inspection by the date set for inspection pursuant to a specified provision. This bill would establish procedures for a person to obtain discovery of electronically stored information, as defined, in addition to documents, tangible things, and land or other property, in the possession of any other party to the action. This bill would permit discovery by the means of copying, testing, or sampling, in addition to inspection, of documents, tangible things, land or other property, or electronically stored information. The Civil Discovery Act permits the party demanding inspection and the responding party to agree to extend the time for service of a response to a set of inspection demands, or to particular items or categories of items in a set, to a date beyond that provided in a specified provision. This bill would permit the parties to agree to extend the date for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling beyond those provided in specified provisions. The Civil Discovery Act requires any documents produced in response to an inspection demand to be produced as they are kept in the usual course of business, or be organized and labeled to correspond with the categories in the demand. The documents are to be produced on the date described above or as agreed to by the parties pursuant to an extension. This bill would make this provision applicable, in addition, to documents produced in response to a demand for copying, testing, or sampling. The bill would furthermore provide that if a party responding to a demand for production of electronically stored information objects to a specified form for producing the information, or if no form is specified in the demand, the responding party shall state in its response the form in which it intends to produce each type of information. In general if a demand for production does not specify a form or forms for producing a type of electronically stored information, the responding party would be required to produce the information in the form or forms in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a form that is reasonably usable, but need not produce the same electronically stored information in more than one form. The bill would also provide that a party seeking a protective order regarding, or a party objecting to or opposing a demand for, production, inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of electronically stored information, on the basis that the information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of the undue burden or expense shall bear the burden of demonstrating that the information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or expense. If it is established that the electronically stored information is from a source that is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or expense, the court may nonetheless order discovery if the demanding party shows good cause, subject to specified restrictions in specified circumstances. Existing law requires the court to impose a monetary sanction, as specified, against any party or any attorney of a party for specified violations. This bill would generally provide that, notwithstanding the above provision, the court shall not impose sanctions on a party or any attorney of a party for failure to provide electronically stored information that has been lost, damaged, altered, or overwritten as the result of the routine, good faith operation of an electronic information system. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Who sponsors AB 5?
AB 5 is sponsored by Corbett, Evans, Feuer, Harman, and Tran.
What is the current status of AB 5?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced December 01, 2008. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 5?
Track AB 5 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 5

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 5

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →