State Court Motion for Reconsideration (Civil)

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA — COUNTY OF [COUNTY]

[MOVING PARTY]'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT'S [DATE] ORDER [DESCRIBING ORDER]; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; AND SUPPORTING DECLARATION OF [DECLARANT NAME] (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1008)

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on [__/__/____] at [HEARING TIME], or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in Department [DEPT.] of the above-entitled Court, located at [COURTHOUSE ADDRESS], [MOVING PARTY NAME] ("Movant") will and hereby does move this Court, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1008, for an order reconsidering, and thereupon modifying, amending, or revoking, the Court's order entered on [__/__/____] [briefly describe the order — e.g., "denying Movant's motion to compel further responses to Requests for Production, Set One"] (the "Order").

This Motion is made on the ground that there are new or different facts, circumstances, or law that warrant reconsideration of the Order within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(a), as more fully set forth in the supporting Declaration of [DECLARANT NAME] and the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities.

This Motion is based on this Notice; the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities; the Declaration of [DECLARANT NAME] and exhibits thereto; all pleadings, records, and papers on file in this action; and such further oral and documentary evidence as may be presented at the hearing.

Dated: [__/__/____]

_______________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME] (State Bar No. [____])
[LAW FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS] | [PHONE] | [EMAIL]
Attorney for [MOVING PARTY]

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

I. INTRODUCTION

By this Motion, Movant respectfully asks the Court to reconsider its Order of [__/__/____]. Reconsideration is warranted because [one-sentence summary: e.g., "after the Court ruled, a controlling appellate decision issued that directly governs the disputed issue" / "Movant has discovered material facts that could not, with reasonable diligence, have been presented at the original hearing"]. As shown below and in the supporting Declaration, this Motion satisfies each requirement of Code of Civil Procedure section 1008.

II. IDENTIFICATION OF THE ORDER TO BE RECONSIDERED

1. On [__/__/____], Movant [or the opposing party] filed [describe the original application/motion].
2. The motion was heard by the Honorable [JUDGE NAME] on [__/__/____].
3. On [__/__/____], the Court [granted / denied / granted in part and denied in part] the motion and entered the Order. [Describe the Order's operative ruling.]
4. Written notice of entry of the Order was served on Movant on [__/__/____]. This Motion is filed and served within 10 days of that service, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(a).

III. LEGAL STANDARD — CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE § 1008

Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(a) provides that, "[w]hen an application for an order has been made to a judge, or to a court, and refused in whole or in part, or granted, or granted conditionally, or on terms, any party affected by the order may, within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order and based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law, make application to the same judge or court that made the order, to reconsider the matter and modify, amend, or revoke the prior order." The moving party "shall state by affidavit what application was made before, when and to what judge, what order or decisions were made, and what new or different facts, circumstances, or law are claimed to be shown." (Id.)

Section 1008 is jurisdictional: "This section specifies the court's jurisdiction with regard to applications for reconsideration of its orders and renewals of previous motions… No application to reconsider any order or for the renewal of a previous motion may be considered by any judge or court unless made according to this section." (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008(e); see also id., § 1008(h) [applies to all applications for interim orders].) The statute thus governs reconsideration of both interim and final orders. (Id., § 1008(e).)

A party seeking reconsideration based on new facts must also provide a satisfactory explanation for failing to produce that evidence earlier. (New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 206, 212; Garcia v. Hejmadi (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 674, 690.) A change of law is a recognized basis for reconsideration, and the court may also reconsider on its own motion upon a change of law. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008(c).) An "alleged new or different law shall not include a later enacted statute without a retroactive application." (Id., § 1008(f).)

IV. ARGUMENT

A. ☐ Intervening Change in Controlling Law

[Identify the new statute or appellate decision and its date. Show that it (a) issued or became effective after the Order, or was otherwise not available to be cited, and (b) directly controls the issue the Court decided.] Because [cite authority] now controls and compels a different result, the Court should reconsider and [modify/revoke] the Order. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008(a), (c).)

B. ☐ New or Different Facts or Circumstances

[Identify the specific new facts or changed circumstances, supported by the Declaration below.] These facts are "new or different" within the meaning of section 1008(a) because [they were not known to Movant at the time of the original hearing / they arose only after the hearing]. As set forth in the Declaration of [DECLARANT NAME], Movant could not, with reasonable diligence, have presented these facts earlier because [explanation]. (New York Times Co., supra, 135 Cal.App.4th at p. 212.)

C. ☐ Clear Error / Manifest Injustice

Should the Court conclude that the Order rests on [a misapprehension of the record / an overlooked controlling authority], Movant respectfully submits that the Court retains inherent authority to reconsider its interim ruling on its own motion to prevent manifest injustice. (Le Francois v. Goel (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1094, 1107–1108.) Movant invites the Court to do so here because [reason].

V. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Movant respectfully requests that the Court reconsider its Order of [__/__/____] and enter a new and different order [granting the relief originally requested / denying the underlying motion / as otherwise specified].

Dated: [__/__/____]

_______________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME] (State Bar No. [____])
Attorney for [MOVING PARTY]

DECLARATION OF [DECLARANT NAME] IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

I, [DECLARANT NAME], declare:

1. I am [the attorney of record for Movant / a party / title and relationship]. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein and, if called as a witness, could and would competently testify thereto.

2. Prior application. On [__/__/____], [Movant / the opposing party] made the following application to this Court: [describe the original motion/application].

3. Judge and ruling. That application was made to and heard by the Honorable [JUDGE NAME]. On [__/__/____], the Court [granted / denied / granted in part] the application and made the following order or decision: [describe the Order].

4. Service of notice of entry. Written notice of entry of the Order was served on [__/__/____]. This Motion is made within 10 days of that service.

5. New or different facts, circumstances, or law. The new or different [facts / circumstances / law] claimed to be shown are as follows: [state each, with specificity]. [If new facts/evidence: explain why these were not, and with reasonable diligence could not have been, presented at the original hearing.]

6. [Attach and authenticate any supporting exhibits: "Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of [document]."]

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on [__/__/____] at [CITY], California.

_______________________________
[DECLARANT NAME]

[PROPOSED] ORDER

The Motion of [MOVING PARTY] for Reconsideration of the Court's [__/__/____] Order, made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1008, came on regularly for hearing on [__/__/____] before the Honorable [JUDGE NAME]. Having considered the moving papers, the supporting Declaration, any opposition and reply, and the argument of counsel, and good cause appearing:

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED. The Court's Order of [__/__/____] is [modified / amended / revoked] as follows: [specify the new ruling].

[OR]

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.

DATED: ____________________

_______________________________
HON. [JUDGE NAME]
Judge of the Superior Court

TIMING AND APPELLATE NOTES (California)

Sanctions warning: A violation of section 1008 — including a motion that merely reargues matters already decided — may be punished as contempt and with sanctions under section 128.7. (CCP § 1008(d).)

CERTIFICATE / PROOF OF SERVICE

(Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 1013, 1013a; Cal. R. Ct. 2.251(c))

I am employed in the County of [COUNTY], State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to this action. My business address is [ADDRESS].

On [__/__/____], I served the foregoing [MOVING PARTY]'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; AND DECLARATION OF [DECLARANT NAME] on the interested parties in this action by:

☐ ELECTRONIC SERVICE (CCP § 1010.6; Cal. R. Ct. 2.251)
☐ FIRST-CLASS MAIL (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a)
☐ OVERNIGHT DELIVERY (CCP § 1013(c))
☐ PERSONAL SERVICE (CCP § 1011)

addressed as follows:

[NAME & ADDRESS / EMAIL OF RECIPIENT(S)]

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on [__/__/____] at [CITY], California.

_______________________________
[NAME OF DECLARANT]

SOURCES & REFERENCES

• Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1008 (motion for reconsideration; renewal; jurisdictional; sanctions): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=1008.&lawCode=CCP
• Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.108(e) (extension of time to appeal after motion to reconsider): https://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=eight&linkid=rule8_108
• Le Francois v. Goel (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1094 (trial court's inherent power to reconsider interim rulings on its own motion).
• New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 206 (diligence requirement for "new facts").
• Garcia v. Hejmadi (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 674 (what qualifies as new or different facts/circumstances/law).
• California Courts Self-Help Guide, "Options other than appealing": https://selfhelp.courts.ca.gov/appeals/other-options