Stern

Stern v. Superior Court

Good Law
105 Cal. App. 4th 223·129 Cal. Rptr. 2d 275·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 34·2003 Daily Journal DAR 363·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 283
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 10, 2003B150315California2,974 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kitching, J.

I. Introduction

Before unification of the lower courts, a case that did not meet the jurisdictional amount in controversy was subject to transfer from superior to municipal court. After court unification and enactment of a new statutory scheme, a case that does not meet the jurisdictional amount in controversy is a “limited civil case” (Code Civ. Proc., § 85) and is subject to reclassification. Despite the change in court organization, nomenclature, and statutes, prior substantive and procedural law continues to govern how a trial court determines whether a case should be reclassified. Applying that law, we hold that a trial court should order jurisdictional reclassification based on the amount in controversy only after the parties have received proper notice and the opposing party has had an opportunity to contest reclassification.

We also find that the trial court may only determine whether a matter shall be a class action after the parties have notice and an opportunity to present evidence. Finally, under Walker v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 257, 262 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 576 , 807 P.2d 418 ], we find that the trial court improperly reclassified this action as a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.