Los Angeles County trial binder and trial document requirements

Counsel must attend a final status conference, which the court will set not more than ten days prior to the trial date.

Ten days is a ceiling on how late the court may set the conference, not a deadline a party counts. Rule 3.25 is captioned CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE but subdivision (f) is captioned Final Trial Preparation and is the trial document rule. Chapter Three reaches all civil limited and unlimited cases under Rule 3.1. This edition speaks of a case assigned for all purposes and the phrase direct calendar appears zero times in the chapter.

(1) A final status conference held more than ten days before the trial date;

Reads with the Rule 3.25(g) lead-in, which opens: 'Nothing in this rule precludes the court, in its discretion and pursuant to the case differentiation principles of case management (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.710 et seq.), from ordering different trial preparation procedures, including the following:'. Discretionary. Complex and long cause cases commonly draw an earlier conference.

In the case management order, the court will set dates for the expert witness list and appraisal exchange, a seven-month status conference, a mandatory settlement conference, a trial readiness conference, and trial.

This is the only trial readiness conference in Chapter Three and Rule 3.238 confines the eminent domain rules to eminent domain and inverse condemnation proceedings. The rule fixes no interval and attaches no document exchange to it. For general civil cases the conference that anchors trial documents is the final status conference under Rule 3.25(f). Do not apply this row to an ordinary civil case.

The court may set a settlement conference on its own motion or at the request of any party.

The general civil settlement conference is discretionary. Nothing in Chapter Three makes one mandatory in an ordinary civil case, and every use of the phrase mandatory settlement conference in the chapter sits in the eminent domain rules.

Each party must submit to the court and serve all other parties a written statement no later than five court days before the conference.

Court days here, unlike the plain days in Rule 3.25(f)(1). Required content in the same subdivision: material facts, factual and legal contentions in dispute, all parties and their capacities, citations of authority, an itemization of special damages with expenses to date, general and punitive damages claimed, a total, and the general status of the case including settlement offers. The same subdivision adds that the statement goes directly to the courtroom in which the conference is calendared, is not sent to the clerk's office, is not filed, and is returned to counsel or destroyed at the conclusion of the conference.

Unless expressly excused for good cause by the judge, all persons whose consent is required to effect a binding settlement must be personally present at a scheduled settlement conference

The subdivision enumerates the three categories and closes: 'These persons must have full authority to negotiate and make decisions on settlement of the case.' In construction defect practice this reaches the carrier representative on every tendered defendant. Missing from the live page.

A request to be excused from attending the settlement conference made by a person who is required to personally attend must be made by written stipulation of the parties or an ex parte application made in compliance with Local Rule 3.5.

The rule adds: 'A person excused by the court must be available for telephone communication with counsel and the court at the time set for the settlement conference.' An ex parte carries its own notice requirements, so this has to be started well before the conference. Missing from the live page.

Counsel must attend the settlement conference and be familiar with the pertinent available evidence involving both liability and damages. Counsel must be prepared to discuss the case in depth and, except for good cause shown, must be the person who will try the case.

Sending appearance counsel to a settlement conference violates this subdivision absent good cause. It parallels the lead trial counsel requirement for the final status conference in Rule 3.25(f)(2). Missing from the live page.

Plaintiff's counsel must ascertain whether there are liens which bear on a potential settlement and, if so, request the claimants or their representatives to attend the settlement conference or be available for telephone communication during the conference.

A duty on plaintiff's counsel alone, and the only lien provision in the chapter. Medical liens, health plan reimbursement and construction lender liens all fall here. No deadline is stated, so it has to be worked before the conference date. Missing from the live page.

The court may hold a mandatory settlement conference in each case before trial.

Confined to eminent domain and inverse condemnation by Rule 3.238. The rule continues: 'The settlement conference shall be scheduled a sufficient time after the exchange of appraisals to allow the parties to conduct expert depositions and engage in settlement discussions. All counsel and all persons with settlement authority must attend the settlement conference in person, unless prior arrangements have been made with the court for that person to appear by telephone.' No conference statement is prescribed here; Rule 3.25(e) governs statements for conferences set under Rule 3.25(d).

Petitioner must prepare a trial notebook to be lodged with the petitioner's reply brief. The trial notebook must consist of the petition, the parties' briefs, any motions set to be heard at trial, the statement of issues, and any requests for judicial notice. The documents should be separated by labelled tabs.

Mandatory rather than discretionary, and the duty falls on the petitioner alone. Timing keys to the reply brief under the briefing schedule set at the trial setting conference under Rule 3.232(h), not to the trial date. The rule specifies tabs but no copy count and no binder size. This is not a general civil trial binder: Rule 3.232(a) applies the mandamus rules to CEQA actions and the requirement reaches only that proceeding.

The court may order the parties to prepare a trial notebook. The trial notebook shall consist of the petition, the parties' briefs, and any requests for judicial notice. The documents shall be separated by labelled tabs.

The quotation stops before the binder sentence because the PDF hyphenates 'three-inch' across a line break, which I confirmed by re-running the match against a de-hyphenated copy. That sentence reads: 'The trial notebook shall be contained in a one- or three-inch binder as appropriate and lodged at the same time as petitioner's reply brief, any joint appendix, and the record.' Discretionary here, unlike the mandatory CEQA version at 3.232(l). This is the only place in the LASC civil rules specifying a physical binder size for a trial notebook, and it is a writ rule. No copy count is given. Not applicable to an ordinary civil jury or bench trial.

The record must be bound in appropriate side-bound three-inch binders. Spiral binding is preferred and three-ring binders are acceptable.

The spine requirement continues: 'If three-ring binders are used, the volume number and an enumeration of the enclosed Bates-stamped pages must be listed on the outside spine of each binder (e.g., Vol. 1, pages 1-323).' Rule 3.231(g)(1) supplies the Bates requirement and the AR citation form. Rule 3.231(h) applies the same side bound three inch requirement to separately presented evidence in traditional mandamus, and Rule 3.232(g) imports the Rule 3.231(g) requirements into CEQA actions. A record binder, not a trial binder.

The joint appendix should be contained in a single spiral bound or three-ring binder.

The subdivision opens 'If the record or evidence is voluminous, the court may order that the parties prepare a joint appendix of the pages actually cited in all of the parties' briefs.' It adds that only cited pages go in, that cover pages are allowed for context, and that parties may highlight and may use different colors to show which side highlighted. Rule 3.232(g) carries it into CEQA actions. Discretionary, and a record compilation rather than a trial binder.

At least five days prior to the final status conference, counsel must serve and file lists of pre-marked exhibits to be used at trial (Local Rules 3.151, 3.53, and 3.149), jury instruction requests, trial witness lists, and a proposed short statement of the case to be read to the jury panel explaining the case. Failure to exchange and file these items may result in not being able to call witnesses, present exhibits at trial, or have a jury trial.

This is the whole of the county's general civil trial document requirement. Four items, lists rather than the exhibits themselves, filed individually rather than jointly, and nothing lodged in paper. The rule says days, not court days. The sanction is discretionary and it reaches the exchange as well as the filing, so serving and filing on time while failing to exchange with opposing counsel is still exposure. The three cross-referenced rules are 3.151, 3.53 and 3.149, each a row below.

If trial does not commence within 30 days of the set trial date, a party has the right to request a modification of any final status conference order or any previously submitted required exchange list.

The escape hatch when a trailing trial pushes past the original date, which is common in Los Angeles. It is a right to request, not automatic relief, and the rule fixes no procedure for making the request.

Unless the court orders otherwise, lead trial counsel must attend the final status conference. At this conference, the court will also consider, inter alia, major evidentiary issues and special verdict issues.

REQUIREMENT NARROWED ON REVIEW. The rebuild opened this row with 'In a case assigned for all purposes,' borrowing the opening clause of Rule 3.25(f)(2). The quoted sentence carries no such limit on its face, it begins a fresh sentence, and Rule 3.25(f) itself opens 'Counsel must attend a final status conference' for every case. Reading the qualifier in tells a master calendar practitioner the lead counsel rule does not reach them, which the text does not support. The safe practice in either assignment model is the same: send lead trial counsel or get an order. Note separately that 'special verdict issues' are considered at the conference, which is consideration, not a requirement to file a proposed verdict form. No county rule requires one before the conference.

(2) An "in person" meeting of counsel before the final status conference concerning the submission to the court of joint trial documents;

Reads with the Rule 3.25(g) lead-in, which makes everything in subdivision (g) something the court may order rather than something the rules require. Most Los Angeles departments impose a meet and confer under this subdivision, commonly counted in calendar days before the conference.

(3) The submission of trial documents to the court more than five days before the final status conference;

This is the subdivision that makes the county's five days a floor rather than the operative date. Department orders routinely move it earlier, and several count in court days. Read the department's courtroom information sheet and any trial setting or case management order before calendaring five days.

Documents must be electronically submitted in PDF text searchable format when technologically feasible without impairment of the document's image.

SPLIT ON REVIEW. The rebuild carried one row citing 'Rule 3.4(f)(1), (f)(2), (f)(3), (f)(4)' while quoting only (f)(2). That is the same above the subdivision defect the rebuild used to drop three live rows, so it is split here into this row and the bookmarking row below, each quoting the subdivision it cites. Rule 3.4(a) makes electronic filing mandatory for represented parties in all civil case types, so this reaches the Rule 3.25(f)(1) documents and motions in limine. Self-represented litigants are exempt under Rule 3.4(c).

Electronic documents, including but not limited to declarations, proofs of service, and exhibits or attachments, must be bookmarked within the document pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1110(f)(4).

The same subdivision continues: 'Electronic bookmarks must include links to the first page of each bookmarked item (e.g., exhibits, declarations, deposition excerpts) and with bookmark titles that identify the bookmark item and briefly describe the item.' Rule 3.4(f)(2) adds 'The table of contents for any document submitted must be bookmarked.' Rule 3.4(f)(4) adds 'Exhibits or attachments to primary documents must be bookmarked' and lists depositions, declarations, exhibits, transcripts, points and authorities, citations and supporting briefs. Rule 3.4(f)(5) strongly encourages hyperlinks. This is the electronic equivalent of tabs and an index and it is the county's only format requirement reaching filed trial documents.

In the discretion of the trial judge, the civil trial rules may be applied differently in a particular case or not at all. The rules are not intended to infringe on the discretion of the trial judge in the conduct of trial proceedings.

Amended and effective July 1, 2026. The scope sentence immediately before the quoted text reads 'The following rules concerning the conduct of trial (Local Rules 3.37 through 3.193) apply to all-purpose assignments and master calendar assigned civil cases.' This is the second delegation clause and it reaches every exhibit, jury instruction and motion in limine rule below. The sanction paragraph reads: 'The court may impose appropriate sanctions for a failure by a party or counsel to comply with these rules, including dismissal, striking of pleadings, vacation of trial date, and monetary sanctions in the amount of costs and actual expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by other parties.' It adds that monetary sanctions payable to the court may be imposed against a party, the party's attorney, or a witness.

The court may impose appropriate sanctions for the failure or refusal to comply with the rules in this chapter, including the time standards and/or deadlines, and any court order made pursuant to the rules.

The chapter wide sanction, broader than Rule 3.37 because it reaches every rule in Chapter Three rather than only Rules 3.37 through 3.193. The rule directs counsel to Code of Civil Procedure sections 128, 128.7, 177.5, 575.2, 583.150, 583.430 and 2016.010 to 2036.050, Government Code section 68608, and California Rules of Court, rule 2.30, and closes 'The sanctions may be imposed on a party and, if appropriate, on counsel for that party.' Missing as a row from the live page, which mentions it only inside another row's note.

At least five days prior to the final status conference, counsel must serve and file lists of pre-marked exhibits to be used at trial (Local Rules 3.151, 3.53, and 3.149), jury instruction requests, trial witness lists, and a proposed short statement of the case to be read to the jury panel explaining the case.

The rule prescribes no content for the witness list. No time estimates, no summary of expected testimony, no expert versus percipient split, no alphabetization, no exclusion of impeachment or rebuttal witnesses. Every requirement of that kind in Los Angeles comes from the department order.

(5) A joint witness list;

Discretionary. Where a department orders one it also tends to trigger the in person meet and confer contemplated by Rule 3.25(g)(2). Nothing in the county rules requires any trial document to be joint.

At the initial case management conference, the court will set a date for the simultaneous exchange of expert witness lists and appraisals. The date of exchange will be no sooner than nine months after the complaint is filed and will be at least 90 days prior to trial, unless the court orders otherwise for good cause shown.

The 90 days is a floor, not the date. The actual exchange date is set by the court in the case management order and is often much earlier. The same subdivision provides that the rule is adopted 'as a substitute for, and as deemed compliance with' Code of Civil Procedure sections 1258.210 to 1258.290, so no formal demand for exchange is needed. Rule 3.241 sets the list content: name, business or residence address, business, occupation or profession, and the subject matter to which the testimony relates. Confined to eminent domain by Rule 3.238.

At least five days prior to the final status conference, counsel must serve and file lists of pre-marked exhibits to be used at trial (Local Rules 3.151, 3.53, and 3.149), jury instruction requests, trial witness lists, and a proposed short statement of the case to be read to the jury panel explaining the case.

Both serve and file, not merely exchange. The rule says days, not court days. The exhibit LIST is filed; the exhibits themselves are excluded from electronic filing by Rule 3.4(b)(3) and are lodged under Rule 3.4(i) or as the department directs. The three cross references are Rule 3.151 (exhibits first disclosed during trial), Rule 3.53 (uniform marking method) and Rule 3.149 (oral identification at first reference).

(6) A joint exhibit list;

Discretionary. This is the closest the county rule comes to a joint trial document product, and it is a list, not a binder. Department orders commonly add columns for offered without objection and for each party's evidentiary objections, and some treat an objection omitted from the list as waived. None of that is in the county rule.

The following documents shall not be submitted electronically:

The exempt list is enumerated and item (3) reads 'Trial and evidentiary hearing exhibits;'. Rule 3.4 was amended and effective January 1, 2026. This is the county's paper versus electronic answer for trial exhibits and it cuts against the general e-filing mandate in Rule 3.4(a). The exhibit list required by Rule 3.25(f)(1) is still served and filed, and so is e-filed by represented parties. The rule states no deadline of its own.

All separate exhibits (i.e., deposition transcripts, bulky items, etc.) not attached to filed papers and presented for motions and trials must be lodged with the court in time for the hearing, or at such other time as the court orders.

This is the only general civil provision on physically delivering trial materials to the court, and it is a lodging rule rather than a binder rule: no copy count, no tabs, no index. The rule continues that lodged exhibits are returned to counsel for preservation after the hearing unless ordered otherwise, requires the envelope or pick-up slip, and states that 'The actual "Notice of Lodgment" document shall be electronically filed.' Rule 3.4 carries an amendment line reading amended and effective January 1, 2026, so a citation to an older subdivision letter of Rule 3.4 should be re-checked. I did not read the prior edition, so the specific prior letter is listed under unknowns rather than asserted here.

All exhibits must be exchanged and pre-numbered, except for those anticipated in good faith to be used for impeachment. All exhibits must be pre-numbered before any reference thereto by counsel or a witness.

The rule carries no deadline of its own. The operative date is the five days before the final status conference exchange in Rule 3.25(f)(1). New and effective July 1, 2011 and unamended since.

Documentary exhibits consisting of more than one page must be internally paginated in sequential numerical order to facilitate reference to the document during interrogation of witnesses.

Numbers, not letters, which cuts against the lettering convention many firms use for correspondence exhibits. The block method sentence is phrased as guidance rather than command: 'The most efficient method of marking exhibits is the use of arabic numerals in which each party is allocated a block of numbers to be used sequentially,' with an illustration allocating plaintiff 1 to 200, the first defendant 201 to 400 and the second defendant 401 to 600. The internal pagination sentence quoted here is the mandatory half. Cross-referenced from Rule 3.25(f)(1).

Counsel must mark for identification an exhibit which has not been pre-marked and which is being used for impeachment before showing the exhibit to opposing counsel or referring to it.

Cross-referenced from Rule 3.25(f)(1). This is the rule that lets impeachment exhibits stay off the pre-marked list, and it is the reason the Rule 3.52 exchange requirement carries its good faith impeachment exception. The rule adds: 'To avoid disruption and delay, the exhibit should be presented to the clerk for formal marking after the evidence regarding it is taken.'

Before the first reference to any exhibit, the proponent must show it to opposing counsel for review. (See also, Local Rule 3.25(f).)

The rule itself points back to Rule 3.25(f), which is where the pretrial exchange obligation lives. Amended and effective July 1, 2014.

Upon the first reference to an exhibit, counsel must briefly identify it, but not describe its contents.

Cross-referenced from Rule 3.25(f)(1), which is why a workable exhibit list needs short neutral descriptions rather than argumentative ones.

Counsel should substitute by photograph, technical report or dummy object, those proposed exhibits which are (1) inherently dangerous (e.g., products that are highly explosive, toxic, corrosive or flammable such as TNT, sulfuric acid, gasoline), or (2) large and cumbersome (e.g., ladder, sewer pipe, automobile chassis).

A preparation decision that has to be made before the exhibit list is built, since the substitute is what gets listed and pre-numbered. Phrased as should rather than must. The rule adds: 'If counsel believes that such an exhibit should be brought into the courtroom, a request to do so must be made to the trial judge outside the jury's hearing,' and that the court may require these exhibits returned to the offering party at the end of trial. Relevant to construction defect practice, where failed assemblies and pipe sections are common exhibits. Missing from the live page.

Any map, plan, or diagram offered in evidence should clearly show whether or not it has been prepared to scale, and if so, what scale was used.

An exhibit preparation requirement, not an in trial one, because the notation has to be on the face of the exhibit before it is pre-numbered and listed. Reaches site plans, as-built drawings and expert demonstratives. Missing from the live page.

The deletion may be accomplished by photocopying in a manner in which the inadmissible portions are redacted. The party offering the exhibit should prepare and furnish the copy.

The burden of producing the redacted version falls on the proponent, so partial admissibility problems identified at the final status conference become the offering party's production task. The rule opens by describing the judge specifying excluded matter outside the jury's hearing, and closes that where redaction by photocopying is not practical the parties should seek to stipulate to another means, failing which only the admissible matter may be read into evidence. Missing from the live page.

Such party should be prepared to furnish sufficient copies of the exhibit, if reasonably practicable, for all jurors and alternates to have their own copy.

The only copy count provision in the civil trial rules, and it is about copies for jurors during trial, not bench copies of a trial binder. No county rule fixes a number of exhibit binder sets. The rule adds that enlargements or projections 'should be used in lieu of, and in preference to, furnishing such copies for the jurors,' and that exhibits not subject to cursory examination are otherwise not handed to jurors until they retire to deliberate.

At least five days prior to the final status conference, counsel must serve and file lists of pre-marked exhibits to be used at trial (Local Rules 3.151, 3.53, and 3.149), jury instruction requests, trial witness lists, and a proposed short statement of the case to be read to the jury panel explaining the case.

Requests, not an agreed set and not full text with the disputed instructions broken out. Form and content of the instructions themselves are governed by Rules 3.170 and 3.171 below, and both apply regardless of any department order.

(7) A set of agreed jury instructions (and, if necessary, a separate set of instructions to which there is disagreement), in the proper format with all changes and modifications applicable to the case in accordance with California Rules of Court, rule 2.1055, (i.e., correct references to the parties, no blanks, brackets, empty spaces or inapplicable options); and

Discretionary. The no blanks requirement is mandatory in every case anyway under Rule 3.170; what this subdivision adds is the agreed set and disputed set structure that most Los Angeles departments impose.

Before delivery of proposed CACI or other instructions to the trial judge and opposing counsel, counsel must fill in all blanks, make all strike-outs, insertions and modifications therein which are appropriate to the case. Submission of a form which requires additions or modifications to constitute a complete and intelligible instruction will not be deemed a request for such instruction.

The consequence is built into the rule and it is a silent waiver rather than a sanction: an unfinished form is not a request at all, which forfeits the instruction and the appellate point with it. Applies to the packet filed five days before the final status conference under Rule 3.25(f)(1).

All proposed jury instructions, except CACI instructions, must conform to the requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 2.1055, including citations of authorities for the instruction, indication of the party requesting the instruction, and how the instruction has been modified from a related CACI instruction. Any jury instructions requested after the conclusion of taking evidence must be in writing.

The same rule permits the court to send instructions into the jury room in booklet format, with the text printed continuously and possibly several instructions to the page, optionally with a table of contents. The rule's heading cites Code of Civil Procedure sections 607a and 609.

Counsel must meet prior to this conference to discuss each other's jury instructions and classify them into categories (1), (2) and (3) above.

The conference is described in the opening sentence: 'The trial judge will hold a conference outside the presence of the jury before final argument and after submission to the trial judge of all proposed jury instructions, verdict and findings forms.' The three categories are patently inappropriate and voluntarily withdrawn, appropriate and given without objection, and modified by stipulation. The conference is ordinarily unreported at the outset and may be reported afterward to confirm what was agreed.

If this procedure is used, counsel must take care to remove the title, citation of authority, and identity of the party requesting the instruction. Care must also be taken to assure that stricken portions are totally obliterated and any handwritten additions are completely legible. It is the responsibility of counsel to supply the court with instructions that comply with the "sanitizing" process.

Means two versions of the instruction set get prepared, the cited version for the court and a sanitized version for the jury room. Whether the jury takes instructions in at all is the trial judge's call under the opening sentence of the rule.

(8) An agreed special verdict form with interrogatories.

Discretionary, and this is the only pretrial verdict form provision in the chapter. A verdict form is NOT on the mandatory Rule 3.25(f)(1) list, so the county requires no proposed verdict form to be served and filed before the final status conference. Most Los Angeles departments add one by order.

The trial judge will hold a conference outside the presence of the jury before final argument and after submission to the trial judge of all proposed jury instructions, verdict and findings forms.

This is where verdict and findings forms actually enter the local rules as a required submission, and it sits inside the trial rules rather than the trial preparation rules. Rule 3.25(f)(2) says the court at the final status conference will consider special verdict issues, which is consideration rather than a submission deadline. I read every one of the 34 uses of the word verdict in Chapter Three; together with Rule 3.25(g)(8) these are the only provisions bearing on a required form.

At least five days prior to the final status conference, counsel must serve and file lists of pre-marked exhibits to be used at trial (Local Rules 3.151, 3.53, and 3.149), jury instruction requests, trial witness lists, and a proposed short statement of the case to be read to the jury panel explaining the case.

Each side files its own proposed statement. The rule sets no word or page limit and prescribes no format beyond short and explaining the case.

(4) A joint statement to be read to the jury;

Discretionary. The default under Rule 3.25(f)(1) is a proposed short statement from each side. Department orders citing this subdivision by number are common, which is how the joint statement became near universal in practice.

The text of a brief statement of the case suitable to be read by the trial judge to the panel of prospective jurors (see Local Rule 3.25(f));

Rule 3.48 lists what the trial judge may determine before a jury panel is summoned, and subdivision (b) cross-references Rule 3.25(f), which is where the filing obligation sits. Rule 3.73 then leaves the use of the statement to the judge: 'The trial judge may read to the prospective jurors a brief statement of the case or, consistent with Code of Civil Procedure section 222.5, permit or direct the parties to deliver mini-opening statements.' So the document is filed on the Rule 3.25(f)(1) clock but may never be read. Missing from the live page, which mentions both rules only inside another row's note.

If any changes are made in a deposition by the deponent after the taking of the deposition, counsel for a party deponent or in the case of a non-party deponent, the counsel who requested the taking of the deposition, must prepare and submit to all other counsel in the case a list of such changes, including the page and line numbers thereof.

No deadline is stated. This is the closest the county rules come to a pretrial deposition exchange obligation and it covers errata only, not designations. It is also the only appearance of the phrase page and line anywhere in Chapter Three. The county publishes no deadline for designations or counter-designations; every such deadline in Los Angeles comes from the department order.

Before reading into evidence any portion of any deposition, interrogatory or request for admission, or showing any video deposition, counsel must obtain leave of court and must then advise the court and opposing counsel which pages and lines of the deposition or the numbers of the interrogatories or requests for admission are to be read.

An in trial procedure, not a pretrial written designation and counter-designation exchange. The rule continues that 'Prior to such reading, opposing counsel must be given a reasonable opportunity to read the same and interpose any objections thereto,' and adds that counsel reading multiple interrogatories should make extracts of the pertinent portions and furnish sufficient copies for adversaries and the court before reading, with the question immediately preceding the answer and the set identified on the extract.

In a case assigned for all purposes, the parties must file and serve any trial preparation motions and dispositive motions, other than summary judgment motions, including motions in limine or bifurcation motion, with timely statutory notice so as to be heard on the day of the final status conference.

July 1, 2026 text. The local rule fixes the hearing date, the day of the final status conference, and leaves the filing deadline to statute. Counting backward under Code of Civil Procedure section 1005(b), plus the electronic service extension in section 1010.6(a)(3)(B), is the practitioner's job and the local rule does not do it. Which model applies is a Rule 3.2 question the rules do not publish, so confirm the district before calendaring.

In a master calendar assigned case, the parties must file and serve trial preparation motions and dispositive motions at least five days before the final status conference, which shall be heard on the first day of trial.

The largest split between the two assignment models. Same document, different filing deadline, different hearing date. Rule 3.2 leaves the choice between an all purpose assignment, a master calendar and a Specialized Civil Court to the supervising judge or the supervising judge's designee, and Chapter Three does not publish the result, so confirm which system the district runs before calendaring anything. The third model resolves to this row: Chapter Two, Rule 2.5(c)(1) provides that a case assigned to a Specialized Civil Court is assigned for trial by a master calendar court and the master calendar rules apply. That sentence is in Chapter Two rather than in the source cited for this row, and I confirmed Chapter Two at the same July 1, 2026 edition.

Motions made for the purpose of precluding the mention or display of inadmissible and prejudicial matter in the presence of the jury must be accompanied by a declaration that includes the following:

Item (a)(2) is a real meet and confer precondition: the declaration must contain 'A representation to the court that the subject of the motion has been discussed with opposing counsel, and that opposing counsel has either indicated that such matter will be mentioned or displayed in the presence of the jury before it is admitted in evidence or that counsel has refused to stipulate that such matter will not be mentioned or displayed in the presence of the jury unless and until it is admitted in evidence'. A motion filed without that conversation is defective on the face of the rule. Under this firm's filing practice the declaration is its own .docx.

A motion in limine may not be used for the purpose of seeking summary judgment or the summary adjudication of an issue or issues. Those motions may only be made in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 437c and applicable court rules.

The rule that stops a dispositive motion arriving as a limine motion at the final status conference, which matters because Rule 3.25(f)(2) expressly excludes summary judgment motions from what is heard that day.

A motion in limine may not be used for the purpose of seeking an order to try an issue before the trial of another issue or issues. That motion may only be made in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 598.

Note the tension with Rule 3.25(f)(2), which expressly contemplates a bifurcation motion heard at the final status conference. The bifurcation motion is allowed; what is barred is dressing it up as a motion in limine instead of complying with section 598. The live page folded this subdivision into the summary adjudication row; they are two distinct prohibitions resting on two different statutes.

The court may defer ruling upon a motion in limine, and may order that no mention or display of the matter that is the subject of the motion be made in the presence of the jury unless and until the court orders otherwise.

A deferred ruling still binds, which is the practical point. Plan trial presentation on the assumption the matter stays out until the court rules. The live page mentions this only inside another row's note.

If the motion in limine is granted, it is the duty of counsel to instruct associates, clients, witnesses, and other persons under their control that no mention or display be made in the presence of the jury of the matter that is the subject of the motion.

An affirmative preparation duty that runs from the ruling to the witness, so it has to be built into witness preparation after the final status conference. The rule continues: 'Without prior leave of court, counsel must not ask a question that: (1) suggest or reveals evidence that was excluded, or (2) reasonably may be anticipated to elicit testimony that was excluded.' The singular suggest is the rule's own wording, quoted as printed. Missing from the live page.

There will be no delay in setting a case for trial because counsel have delayed conducting discovery or otherwise delayed processing the case.

The trial date is the anchor every other date on this page runs off, and this subdivision is what governs how it gets set. The subdivision opens 'In setting a trial date, the court shall be guided by the case disposition time goals set forth in Local Rule 3.23 and California Rules of Court, rule 3.714, and shall apply the relevant facts and circumstances set forth in California Rules of Court, rule 3.729.' Missing from the live page.

The following civil matters are not subject to case management conference or review: (1) limited civil cases and Personal Injury Actions heard in the Central District personal injury hub courts (see Local Rule 3.23);

Scope check before using any row on this page. Rule 3.25(a)(1) carries the exemption expressly, opening 'Except for cases exempt under Rule 3.24(b), in all unlimited civil cases, the case management conference shall be held not later than 180 days after the complaint is filed.' That express carve-out appears only in subdivision (a). Subdivision (f), the trial document rule, carries no equivalent carve-out, so on the face of the rules a personal injury hub case still runs on the Rule 3.25(f) final status conference calendar. Rule 3.23 points to a Standing Order re Procedures in the Personal Injury Hub Courts that is not part of Chapter Three and that I did not read, so confirm with the department rather than relying on this note. Missing from the live page.

At the final status conference, the court will consider severing for trial all unserved or recently served fictitiously named parties.

Matters in construction defect practice, where late served subcontractors and Doe amendments are routine. Expect the issue raised on the court's own motion, so a party wanting a late served defendant kept in should be ready to justify it at the conference.

Counsel must provide the court with reasonable and accurate time estimates for trial. If the time estimate of either party is exceeded, the court may, in its discretion, deem one or both parties to have rested, deem the matter submitted, continue the trial to a new trial date, or declare a mistrial.

The sanction is stated in the rule and being deemed to have rested is the one that ends a case. Several departments tie the witness list to the estimate and require that the total testimony time on the list not exceed it.

Unless the signing of a deposition is waived, or certification by the deposition officer is obtained pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.540, all depositions must be signed and lodged with the clerk of the trial court before the commencement of trial.

No interval is stated, so this is any time up to the first day of trial. In a case with many depositions the lodging itself takes lead time, and it runs to the clerk of the trial court rather than to the department.

If a party proposes to obtain documents in the custody of a nonparty, as by a subpoena duces tecum, and those documents may be produced by certification or otherwise in lieu of personal appearance by a witness custodian, the request for those documents must specify that they be delivered not later than the first day for which the trial is calendared.

The obligation runs on the drafting of the subpoena, so it has to be built in well before the exhibit list deadline. Records arriving after the first day of trial are unlikely to make the pre-marked exhibit list at all.

The record, and joint appendix if one is ordered, must be lodged when the petitioner's reply brief is filed unless the court orders otherwise.

The CEQA version at Rule 3.232(g) reads: 'The certified record, which must be well-organized and consecutively paginated (Bates-stamped) as required by Local Rule 3.231(g), must be lodged with the court when petitioner's reply brief is filed. Any joint appendix ordered by the court also must be lodged with the reply brief.' The briefing schedule is set at the trial setting conference under Rule 3.232(h), so this date is keyed to that order and not to the trial date.

The parties are required by Public Resources Code section 21167.8(f) to file and serve a statement of issues which will be used by the opposing party and the court in identifying the legal and factual contentions at trial. The statements of issues must be consistent with, and may not expand on, the scope of the pleadings.

The statement of issues is itself a required tab in the CEQA trial notebook under Rule 3.232(l). The local rule sets no deadline of its own and points to the Public Resources Code.

At least 20 calendar days prior to the date of trial, plaintiff must file with the court and serve on the defendant(s) its final offer for the property sought to be condemned, and defendant must file with the court and serve on the plaintiff its final demand.

Calendar days, expressly, which makes this one of the few intervals in the chapter that names its day type. The rule cites Code of Civil Procedure section 1250.410, the litigation expenses statute, so the filing bears directly on a later fees claim. The alternative is in the same rule: 'Alternatively, the parties may agree that the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 1250.410 will be satisfied by exchanging and filing final offers and demands at the conclusion of the mandatory settlement conference.' Confined to eminent domain by Rule 3.238.

If a party fails to properly exchange expert lists or appraisals as required by these rules, any affected party may move to preclude the witness from testifying to an opinion or data

The quotation stops where the PDF hyphenates 'case-in-chief' across a line break, which I confirmed by re-running the match against a de-hyphenated copy; the sentence ends 'during the case-in-chief of the party offering the witness.' Relief from preclusion turns on three factors the rule lists: whether the moving party in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have determined to call the witness or discovered the opinion, whether the failure was through mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect, and the extent of the opposing party's reliance and prejudice. Rule 3.243 governs amendment of expert lists and appraisals after exchange. Confined to eminent domain by Rule 3.238.

In small claims court cases the parties must exchange exhibits and the parties must inform the clerk before trial of any special challenges to be made, such as venue.

Captioned Trial Preparation and it is the only trial preparation rule for the small claims docket. Note that here the exhibits themselves are exchanged, not a list of them, which is the opposite of the Rule 3.25(f)(1) structure for general civil. No interval is stated. Missing from the live page.