A request for judicial notice in California is the topic of this blog post.
A request for judicial notice in California is authorized by Evidence Code sections 450 through 460. However judicial notice can only be taken of certain matters as Evidence Code section 450 states in pertinent part that judicial notice may not be taken of any matter unless authorized or required by law.
Types of judicial notice in California.
There are two types of judicial notice, mandatory judicial notice and permissive judicial notice.
Mandatory judicial notice in California.
Mandatory judicial notice in California is authorized by Evidence Code section 451 which states that the Court must take judicial notice of the following matters:
“(a) The decisional, constitutional, and public statutory law of this state and of the United States and the provisions of any charter described in Section 3, 4, or 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution.
(b) Any matter made a subject of judicial notice by Section 11343.6, 11344.6, or 18576 of the Government Code or by Section 1507 of Title 44 of the United States Code.
(c) Rules of professional conduct for members of the bar adopted pursuant to Section 6076 of the Business and Professions Code and rules of practice and procedure for the courts of this state adopted by the Judicial Council.
(d) Rules of pleading, practice, and procedure prescribed by the United States Supreme Court, such as the Rules of the United States Supreme Court, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Admiralty Rules, the Rules of the Court of Claims, the Rules of the Customs Court, and the General Orders and Forms in Bankruptcy.
(e) The true signification of all English words and phrases and of all legal expressions.
(f) Facts and propositions of generalized knowledge that are so universally known that they cannot reasonably be the subject of dispute.”
Permissive judicial notice in California.
Permissive judicial notice in California is authorized by Evidence Code section 452 which states that the Court may take judicial notice of the following matters:
“(a) The decisional, constitutional, and statutory law of any state of the United States and the resolutions and private acts of the Congress of the United States and of the Legislature of this state.
(b) Regulations and legislative enactments issued by or under the authority of the United States or any public entity in the United States.
(c) Official acts of the legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the United States and of any state of the United States.
(d) Records of (1) any court of this state or (2) any court of record of the United States or of any state of the United States.
(e) Rules of court of (1) any court of this state or (2) any court of record of the United States or of any state of the United States.
(f) The law of an organization of nations and of foreign nations and public entities in foreign nations.
(g) Facts and propositions that are of such common knowledge within the territorial jurisdiction of the court that they cannot reasonably be the subject of dispute.
(h) Facts and propositions that are not reasonably subject to dispute and are capable of immediate and accurate determination by resort to sources of reasonably indisputable accuracy.”
Requirement for a request for judicial notice in California.
In order to request judicial notice in California you must give notice of your request to each adverse party to enable that party to meet the request, and must furnish the Court with sufficient information to enable it to take judicial notice of the matter. See Evidence Code § 453.
However judicial notice has limitations in that the court can only take judicial notice of recorded documents, it cannot take judicial notice of said documents if their truth or authenticity is disputed. See Skov v. U.S. Bank National Assn. (2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 690, 696 (where bank sought judicial notice of a notice of default declaration stating compliance with Civ. Code, § 2923.5, whether the bank complied with section 2923.5 is the type of fact that is reasonably subject to dispute, and thus, not a proper subject of judicial notice.)
Although the existence of a document may be judicially noticeable, the truth of statements contained in the document and its proper interpretation are not subject to judicial notice if those matters are reasonably disputable. StorMedia, Inc. v. Superior Court (1999) 20 Cal.4th 449, 457, fn. 9.
When judicial notice is taken of a document, however, the truthfulness and proper interpretation of the document are disputable. Joslin v. H.A.S. Ins. Brokerage (1986) 184 Cal. App.3d 369, 374. Joslin v. H.A.S. Ins. Brokerage, supra, 184 Cal.App.3d at page 374 stated: “Taking judicial notice of a document is not the same as accepting the truth of its contents or accepting a particular interpretation of its meaning.
It should be noted that judicial notice of other Court records and files is limited to matters that are indisputably true. See Fremont Indem. Co. v. Fremont Gen. Corp. (2007) 148 Cal.App. 4th 97, 113. This means that judicial notice is limited to the orders and judgments in the other court file, as distinguished from the contents of documents filed therein.
A request for judicial notice in California is a very useful tool in litigation so long as you take into account the limitations of judicial notice.
An experienced litigation attorney can evaluate your situation and determine if a request for judicial notice is appropriate in your case. Contact attorney Nathan Mubasher for a consultation and evaluation of your case.
Schedule a consultation today with litigation attorney Nathan Mubasher.
Call (800) 691-2721 and let’s talk about your options.
CONTACT INFORMATION FOR NATHAN MUBASHER:
Law Offices of Nathan Mubasher
2621 Green River Rd, Ste 105 PMB 403
Corona, CA 92882
tel 1-800-691-2721 | fax 1-310-356-3660
Thank you for reading. I hope I could have been educational as I endeavor to provide my knowledge as a free public service. Please note that all the materials and information on this blog are general analyses made available for the public’s general informational purposes only. These analyses are not in any way intended to serve as specific legal advice to be applied in your particular situation. Although I am an attorney, absent a signed retention and engagement letter, I am not your attorney. There are no exceptions to this rule. Moreover, you shall not rely on the information I am providing you, as it is only for your general knowledge and educational purposes, since this information would likely change based on any additional facts. Thus the transmission and receipt of information on this blog by anyone does not form or constitute an attorney-client relationship. My knowledge of laws is limited to California. Anyone receiving any information on this blog should not act upon the information provided without first obtaining the services of professional legal counsel licensed in their respective jurisdiction. Best of luck.