Third lens
What breaks, and whether it can be fixed
The question behind most searches is not what the rule is. It is what happens if you get it wrong. Every failure named anywhere on the site, sorted by whether a court can still do anything about it.
Fatal
Miss it and no court can fix it. Calendar these first, and never on a single reminder.
76 listed
- You propound past 35 without the declaration, they object to the balance, and the fix lands after the discovery cutoff.The responding party answers the first 35 and objects to the rest. CCP 2030.030(c)Serving a second set before the first is answered
- You withdraw Set One assuming the 35 resets, serve a fresh 35 with no declaration, and the same objection lands too late to fix.Nothing says a withdrawn interrogatory stops counting, and CCP 2030.050Serving a second set before the first is answered
- Counting 45 days and stoppingThe service-method extension is part of the deadline, not a courtesy, so a calendar entry that ignores it is short by two court days or five calendar days. ShorThe 45-day deadline to compel further
- An oral or open-ended extensionThe statutes require a writing and a specific later date. An agreement to extend "while we continue to meet and confer" satisfies neither, and Standon Co.The 45-day deadline to compel further
- Filing a notice and serving the papers laterWeinstein v. BlumbergThe 45-day deadline to compel further
- Letting the 45 days run on a motion to compel further responsesThe deadline in CCP 2030.300(c)When opposing counsel stops responding
- Relying on an extension that was never put in writingOnce the response date passes the objections are waived by statute. CCP 2030.290(a)When opposing counsel stops responding
- Asking for issue or evidence sanctions before any order compelling discovery existsNew Albertsons, Inc. v. Superior CourtWhen opposing counsel stops responding
- You let their 45 days run while arguing in correspondenceTheir window under CCP 2030.300(c)Auditing a meet and confer letter
- You said "will comply" and did not produceCCP 2031.320Auditing a meet and confer letter
- Letting a privilege question go by without objectingCCP 2025.460(a)When you cannot instruct your client not to answer
- A privilege stated loosely, or stated after the answerCCP 2025.460(a)What is actually privileged at a deposition
- Letting the fee agreement leave the tableHanna v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLCWhat is actually privileged at a deposition
- You test, nobody preserves a sample, and the condition is gone.There is no order to vacate and no response to amend. The consequence is the willful suppression inference and it is argued to the jury at trial. Evid. Code 413Destructive testing on your own client's property
- You refuse attendance, then the expert's opinion rests on what only your expert saw.You have created an evidentiary record that exists in one party's control by that party's choice. Nothing in the Discovery Act fixes this later, and it is the fDestructive testing on your own client's property
- Adding a service extension to a notice of intention to move for new trialBoth CCP 1013(a)The 16-court-day motion clock
- Reserve the hearing dateNotice and filing both run backward from it.Ex parte applications
- Run the 1005(b) calculation and put the dates in the papersIf a noticed motion still works, ask for an order shortening time instead.Ex parte applications
- Delete any sanctions requestThe court cannot grant it and asking undercuts the rest.Ex parte applications
- Notice the prior court day, to the right personState the date, time, department, and every alternative form of relief. Ask whether they will oppose, and record the answer.Ex parte applications
- File all five documents, serve the papers, appearProposed order included. Service is separate from notice.Ex parte applications
- Quietly deleting the allegation that is causing the problemThe sham pleading doctrine lets the court notice the earlier version and disregard the inconsistency, and where no explanation is offered it may sustain withoutWhat a demurrer can and cannot reach
- Assuming a ground the trial court ignored is goneAn order sustaining a demurrer will be affirmed if any ground properly specified in the demurrer supports it, whether or not the trial court relied on it. CantuWhat a demurrer can and cannot reach
- Serving on 75 days because that is what the form saidCCP 437c(a)(2)Summary judgment timing and the separate statement
- Arguing a ground that appears in the brief but not in the separate statement"Without facts set forth in a separate statement to support a ground for summary judgment, summary judgment cannot be granted on that ground." Roger H. Proulx &Summary judgment timing and the separate statement
- Putting the declaration you needed into the reply papersBarred by CCP 437c(b)(4)Replying to an opposition separate statement
- Filing a document captioned as a reply separate statementThe statute names it. CCP 437c(b)(4)Replying to an opposition separate statement
- Filing the 128.7 or 128.5 motion without serving it 21 days firstCCP 128.7(c)(1)Sanctioning obstructive opposing counsel
- Supporting any motion with something said in a mediationEvid. Code 1119(a)Sanctioning obstructive opposing counsel
- Filing after the window that applied has closedCCP 170.6(a)(2)Peremptory challenges under CCP 170.6
- Letting the 10 day writ window pass after a denialCCP 170.3(d)Peremptory challenges under CCP 170.6
- A second challenge from a side that has already used oneCCP 170.6(a)(4)Peremptory challenges under CCP 170.6
- Waiting until after the judge has decided a contested fact issue on the meritsThe protection in CCP 170.6(a)(2)Peremptory challenges under CCP 170.6
- Aiming it at the wrong judgeOff a master calendar the motion goes to the master calendar judge when the case is assigned, and by the time the trial judge sees it the window has shut, CCP 1Peremptory challenges under CCP 170.6
- Letting the five years runCCP 583.360(a)The five-year rule
- Relying on a stipulation that waived a different deadlineA stipulation dropping the case from the calendar and waiving the two-year discretionary period does not extend the five-year period. MartinThe five-year rule
- Relying on the other side's depositCCP 631(f)(5)The jury fee deposit that waives your jury trial
- Taking the bench trial and raising it on appealTriCoastThe jury fee deposit that waives your jury trial
- Waiting for the tentative decision after a one-day trialWhere the trial concluded within one calendar day, or in less than eight hours over more than one day, the request had to be made "prior to the submission of thThe statement of decision, and the objection that preserves it
- Getting the statement of decision and saying nothing about what it left outSections 632 and 634 together "set forth the means by which to avoid application of these inferences in favor of the judgment," and both steps are needed. In reThe statement of decision, and the objection that preserves it
- Objecting to something you never put in the requestThe request defines the scope. A party who requested a statement on one narrow formulation of an issue could not object that the statement failed to address a bThe statement of decision, and the objection that preserves it
- Filing the notice of appeal lateRule 8.104(b): "Except as provided in rule 8.66, no court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal. If a notice of appeal is filed late, the reviewing couEntry of judgment, notice of entry, and the clocks they start
- Adding five days, or two court days, to the new trial or vacatur windowCCP 1013(a)Entry of judgment, notice of entry, and the clocks they start
- Letting the court's 75 days run out while waiting for a hearing dateCCP 660(c)Entry of judgment, notice of entry, and the clocks they start
- Letting the five-year date pass on the strength of a continued trial dateCCP 583.360(b)Continuing a trial date
- Treating the new trial date as reopening discoveryCCP 2024.020(b)Continuing a trial date
- Making the demand for the first time inside the mediationEvid. Code 1119(a)The policy limits demand
- A noncompliant demand where the chapter appliesCCP 999.4(a)The policy limits demand
- No acceptance provision in the offerMostafavi Law GroupCCP 998 offers to compromise
- An unapportioned offer to multiple partiesMeissnerCCP 998 offers to compromise
- Offering the exact number you think the case is worthShain v. City of AlbanyCCP 998 offers to compromise
- Using a shared demand offensively at the good faith settlement hearingLong Beach Memorial Medical Center v. Superior CourtSharing a demand with a co-defendant
- Filing the dismissal first and asking the court to keep the case afterwardsWackeen v. MalisEnforcing a settlement under section 664.6
- Relying on the retention paragraph inside the settlement agreementSayta v. ChuEnforcing a settlement under section 664.6
- Filing the memorandum after the fifteen daysSanabria v. EmbreyThe memorandum of costs, and the motion to tax
- Claiming a discretionary award on the cost memorandumNeeble-Diamond v. Hotel California By the Sea, LLCThe memorandum of costs, and the motion to tax
- Letting the fifteen days to move to tax runRule 3.1700(b)(4): after the time for a motion to strike or tax has passed, "the clerk must immediately enter the costs on the judgment." As Neeble-DiamondThe memorandum of costs, and the motion to tax
- Assuming relation backNorgart v. Upjohn Co.Amending a complaint: filing it vs needing leave
- Letting the 3 years run while you keep lookingOnce the CCP 583.210(a)Serving a defendant you cannot find
- Getting the order without the affidavit the statute wantsFor publication, the affidavit is a jurisdictional prerequisite and a verified complaint will not stand in for it. Skip it and the judgment is void. Olvera v. OServing a defendant you cannot find
- Leaving the papers with the person in charge and never mailing the copyCCP 415.20(a)Serving a California business entity: who you actually hand it to
- Delivering to the Secretary of State without a court orderCorp. Code 1702(a)Serving a California business entity: who you actually hand it to
- Treating a returned-nothing section 415.30 mailing as serviceCCP 415.30(c)Serving a California business entity: who you actually hand it to
- Treating the presentation deadline as tollableEquitable tolling does not reach Gov. Code 911.2The two six-month clocks in a public entity case
- Counting the six months to sue from receipt of the rejectionGov. Code 945.6(a)(1)The two six-month clocks in a public entity case
- Waiting for a denial letter before calendaring the 946.6 petitionThe six months runs from denial or deemed denial, not from notice of it. Rason v. Santa Barbara City Housing AuthorityThe two six-month clocks in a public entity case
- Filing the late claim application on day 366The one-year cap in Gov. Code 911.4(b)The two six-month clocks in a public entity case
- Serving the entity while the claim is still outService of the original complaint before filing an amended complaint alleging rejection is the fact that took substantial compliance off the table in Harland v.Suing a public entity before the claim is rejected
- Dismissing without prejudice and refiling after rejectionHarlandSuing a public entity before the claim is rejected
- Running the continuing-tort argument as tollingThe presentation deadline is not a statute of limitations and equitable tolling does not reach it. Willis v. City of CarlsbadSuing a public entity before the claim is rejected
- The State Bar referralIf sanctions issue, the clerk forwards the opinion. Bus. & Prof. Code 6086.7(a)(3)You cited a hallucinated case. Now what?
- Missing the 30-day self-reportA separate 6068(o)(3)You cited a hallucinated case. Now what?
- The five-year date passes on your watchDismissal under CCP 583.360(a)Substituting into a case before trial
- The 473(b) six months runs out while you investigateMandatory relief from a default, default judgment or involuntary dismissal requires the application within 6 months of entry of judgment. Nothing tolls it for aSubstituting into a case before trial
- Substituting in, then deciding the date is unworkable and getting outAn attorney who voluntarily abandons a case without good cause is denied compensation, and Estate of FalcoSubstituting into a case before trial
- An hourly charging lien that skipped rule 1.8.1Fletcher v. DavisSubstituting into a case before trial
Curable
Relief exists, but only on a showing you have to be in a position to make later.
52 listed
- Your interrogatories carry subparts, so the real count is double what your caption says.Each specially prepared interrogatory must be full and complete in itself and carry no subparts or compound, conjunctive or disjunctive question. CCP 2030.060(dServing a second set before the first is answered
- A second document goes out labeled Set One, or a Set One follows a Set Two.Sets must be numbered consecutively and the number appears in the first paragraph below the caption. CCP 2030.060(a)Serving a second set before the first is answered
- You grant or take an extension on the phone and never paper it.The agreement may be informal but "it shall be confirmed in a writing that specifies the extended date for service of a response." CCP 2030.270(b)Serving a second set before the first is answered
- A thin meet and confer or a defective separate statementObregonThe 45-day deadline to compel further
- A meet and confer declaration built entirely out of emailCCP 2016.040When opposing counsel stops responding
- You confirmed completeness in a letter instead of a verified responseA letter amends nothing and withdraws nothing, and it will still be read into the record at the hearing. Serving verified amended responses under CCP 2030.310Auditing a meet and confer letter
- You supplemented under the statute they named rather than the one that appliesAnswering an interrogatory as though CCP 2031.230Auditing a meet and confer letter
- Instructing the client not to answer because the question is irrelevantStewartWhen you cannot instruct your client not to answer
- Announcing you are stopping the deposition without demanding suspensionCCP 2025.470When you cannot instruct your client not to answer
- Asking a plaintiff about sexual conduct without the orderCCP 2017.220(a)When you cannot instruct your client not to answer
- Instructing on relevance, materiality or admissibilityThose objections are unnecessary and are never waived, CCP 2025.460(c)What is actually privileged at a deposition
- You withhold the expert's reports and writings at the exchange because you withheld them before.The court shall exclude the expert opinion of a witness whose party has unreasonably failed to produce reports and writings, on objection by a party who complieDestructive testing on your own client's property
- You concede in writing that section 2031.060 governs your testing, then try to argue otherwise.The section requires a demand that was never served. CCP 2031.060(a)Destructive testing on your own client's property
- Adding section 1013 days to your opposition deadlineCCP 1005(b)The 16-court-day motion clock
- Counting the mail extension from the hearing dateCCP 12c(b)The 16-court-day motion clock
- Arguing the merits of a short-noticed motion and then complaining about noticeCarlton v. QuintThe 16-court-day motion clock
- Build the notice declaration from rule 3.1204(b), item by itemSix facts and a timing representation.Ex parte applications
- Arguing the court cannot look at its own docketEvid. Code 452(d)What a demurrer can and cannot reach
- Requesting judicial notice without attaching anythingEvid. Code 453What a demurrer can and cannot reach
- Filing an opposing separate statement that does not track the moving oneGranting on a deficient but genuine opposing statement, with no opportunity to cure, is an abuse of discretion. Parkview Villas Assn., Inc. v. State Farm Fire &Summary judgment timing and the separate statement
- Answering all 87 responses and running out of pages at 40Rule 3.1113(d)Replying to an opposition separate statement
- Calendaring the reply 5 days outIt has been 11 days since January 1, 2025. CCP 437c(b)(4)Replying to an opposition separate statement
- Bringing obstructive discovery conduct under section 128.5CCP 128.5(e)Sanctioning obstructive opposing counsel
- Assuming a stay you agreed to has been tolling the clockGaines v. Fidelity National Title Ins. Co.The five-year rule
- Counting on courtroom unavailability to tollOswald v. Landmark Builders, Inc.The five-year rule
- Paying lateWaiver attaches under CCP 631(f)(5)The jury fee deposit that waives your jury trial
- Missing the 15-day objection window under rule 3.1590(g)CCP 634The statement of decision, and the objection that preserves it
- Serving a document that does not qualify under rule 8.104(a)(1)A document not entitled "Notice of Entry," not a filed-endorsed copy of the judgment, or served without the proof of service that (B) requires, does not start tEntry of judgment, notice of entry, and the clocks they start
- Missing the 15 day memorandum of costs deadlineRule 3.1700(b)(3) lets the parties agree to extend it in a writing filed with the clerk, and absent agreement lets the court extend it up to 30 days. That discrEntry of judgment, notice of entry, and the clocks they start
- Missing the expert exchange because it was calendared off the new trial dateCCP 2034.220Continuing a trial date
- Signing a stipulation and never filing anythingRule 3.1332(b) requires a noticed motion or an ex parte application "whether contested or uncontested or stipulated to by the parties." An unfiled stipulation lContinuing a trial date
- Sloppy execution once the carrier says yesBirdsall v. HelfetThe policy limits demand
- A token offer, or one served before they could evaluate itLicudineCCP 998 offers to compromise
- Assuming a pre-trial settlement or a dismissal ends the analysisMadrigal v. Hyundai Motor AmericaCCP 998 offers to compromise
- Refusing on a waiver theory, or sharing on oneBoth directions misread SimmonsSharing a demand with a co-defendant
- Reaching for 1152 and 1154 while 1119 is still availableThey bar particular uses at trial; they do not bar discovery or disclosure, and arguments built on them invite carve-outs the 1119 scheme does not have. While tSharing a demand with a co-defendant
- Letting the recipient put the mediation in front of a later tribunalThis is what Evid. Code 1128Sharing a demand with a co-defendant
- A signature gap in a case type where counsel cannot signCCP 664.6(c)Enforcing a settlement under section 664.6
- Leaving a material term for the court to supplyWeddington Productions, Inc. v. FlickEnforcing a settlement under section 664.6
- Assuming a service extension bought you time on your own memorandumRule 3.1700(b)(1) extends the objector's period for mail under CCP 1013The memorandum of costs, and the motion to tax
- Reading leave-to-amend after a demurrer as leave to do anythingLe Mere v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist.Amending a complaint: filing it vs needing leave
- Quietly deleting the allegation that is killing youDeveny v. Entropin, Inc.Amending a complaint: filing it vs needing leave
- A publication order missing the 415.50(b) mailing clauseThe order has to direct mailing if the address turns up before publication ends. Without the clause the order is defective on its face, and 4 weeks of newspaperServing a defendant you cannot find
- A proof of service that names the recipient and no capacityCCP 417.10(a)Serving a California business entity: who you actually hand it to
- Citing the pre-2022 numbering of sections 911.6 and 946.6SB 501 renumbered the mandatory-relief grounds. Section 946.6(c)(4) is now total incapacity, not death of the claimant. Reading the current subdivision text catThe two six-month clocks in a public entity case
- Presenting a claim you did not need to presentNo claim is required for inverse condemnation under article I, section 19. Gov. Code 905.1The two six-month clocks in a public entity case
- Citing Bahten for amendment curing prematurityBahten v. County of MercedSuing a public entity before the claim is rejected
- Arguing the defect is jurisdictional, or conceding that it isIt is not. BoddeSuing a public entity before the claim is rejected
- The false statement itselfRule 3.3 gives you the correction. Del BiaggioYou cited a hallucinated case. Now what?
- Your briefShayanYou cited a hallucinated case. Now what?
- Assuming a continued trial date reopened discoveryCCP 2024.020(b)Substituting into a case before trial
- Disbursing settlement funds over an asserted lienA third party who impairs an attorney's rights under a valid charging lien can be liable for tortious interference. Little v. Amber Hotel Co.Substituting into a case before trial
Strategic
Nothing is lost by getting it wrong except the position you wanted to be in.
16 listed
- You count on the responding party not noticing the overage.Section 2030.030(c) does require them to state the objection, so an overage sometimes gets answered. It is a plan that works until the one time it matters, and Serving a second set before the first is answered
- Going ex parte because you ran out of timeA court will not grant ex parte relief in any but the plainest and most certain of cases, and should deny an application absent the affirmative factual showing When opposing counsel stops responding
- They cited the wrong response numbersCorrect it in writing and invite them to identify what they still contend is deficient. If a motion follows, the separate statement exposes the mismatch on its Auditing a meet and confer letter
- A privacy instruction on a marginal subjectJohn B.What is actually privileged at a deposition
- You answer the letter with the statute and nothing else.You will be right and it will not help. The letter is an exhibit being assembled for a jury instruction, and a technically correct refusal is the best paragraphDestructive testing on your own client's property
- Building an opposition around the other side's meet and confer failureCCP 430.41(a)(4)What a demurrer can and cannot reach
- Filing written evidentiary objections and then not raising them at the hearingCCP 437c(b)(5)Summary judgment timing and the separate statement
- Asking for a monetary sanction on the court's inherent powerBauguess v. PaineSanctioning obstructive opposing counsel
- A declaration that drifts from the statutory form, or no oath at allReassignment under CCP 170.6(a)(4)Peremptory challenges under CCP 170.6
- Forgetting the daily deposit once trial startsCCP 631(f)(6)The jury fee deposit that waives your jury trial
- Conditions the carrier could not perform, on a clean claim historyHedayatiThe policy limits demand
- Only ever trying the designated agentFor a corporation, the 1702(a) affidavit can be made on the 415 hand-service methods or on failed service under CCP 416.10Serving a defendant you cannot find
- Expecting the 911.3 waiver to protect a property or contract claimSection 911.3 reaches only six-month-tier claims. Westcon Construction Corp. v. County of SacramentoThe two six-month clocks in a public entity case
- Answering Harland with relation backRelating the amended pleading back to the original filing date makes the prematurity worse rather than better, because the original filing is the thing that wasSuing a public entity before the claim is rejected
- Your name in a published opinionEvery one of these decisions names the lawyer. The $1,500 is not the expensive part.You cited a hallucinated case. Now what?
- No substitution on file while you work the caseYou have no standing to appear or file, and under CCP 285Substituting into a case before trial