Civil actions: exceptions to dismissal for delay in prosecution.
Summary
Existing law authorizes a court to dismiss an action for delay in prosecution if, among other conditions, an action is not brought to trial within a specified period of time. Existing law prohibits dismissal of an action for dissolution of marriage or for legal separation of parties under specified conditions, including if a valid order for child or spousal support exists or, in an action for dissolution of marriage, a separate trial on the issue of the status of marriage has been conducted as provided by law. This bill would expand the types of actions to which the exception to dismissal of an action for delay in prosecution would apply and would include an action for the dissolution of a domestic partnership, an action based on void or voidable marriage, and an action relating to a child custody or visitation order. The bill would prohibit those actions from being dismissed under the specified conditions that would also include if an order regarding child custody or visitation has been issued, as specified, or if a valid personal conduct restraining order exists and if an issue in the case has been bifurcated, as specified.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Jun 2013
Assembly Passage
Apr 2013
Senate Passage
Jun 2013
Signed into Law
Jun 2013
Introduced Feb 20, 2013
Signed Jun 28, 2013
Floor votes · Senate Jun 10, 2013 · Assembly Jun 14, 2013
How they voted
29–0
Passed · 6 other
Total votes 35
Jun 10, 2013
D
Democratic26
76% Yea
R
Republican9
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
22
Key actions
7
Committee
7
Amendments
3
Jun 28, 2013
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Jun 14, 2013
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (64-0)
assembly
Jun 14, 2013
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 77. Noes 0. Page 1982.).
lower
Jun 10, 2013
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (29-0-6)
senate
Jun 10, 2013
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after June 12 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Jun 4, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. To consent calendar. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 4).
upper
May 24, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Apr 25, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Apr 8, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. To consent calendar. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (April 2).
lower
Apr 1, 2013
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Mar 21, 2013
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 4, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Feb 21, 2013
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Richard Bloom
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 522
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 522. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline