AB-859
Justice & Public Safety

Civil Procedure: recovery of defense costs.

Engrossed
CA
2025-2026 Regular Session
0
0
Track

Key Takeaways

  • Expands the ability of defendants to recover legal costs when opposing parties file cases without good faith.
  • Allows courts to award defense costs when granting demurrer motions that dismiss baseless claims.
  • Requires courts to determine if plaintiffs filed their cases with reasonable cause before awarding costs.
  • Covers attorney fees, expert witness costs, and consulting expenses in defense cost awards.

Summary

Assembly Member Macedo's civil procedure reform measure expands defendants' ability to recover legal costs when facing lawsuits filed without merit, adding demurrer objections to the existing framework for defense cost recovery in California civil proceedings.

Under current law, defendants in Government Claims Act cases and civil actions for indemnity or contribution can petition courts to evaluate whether plaintiffs filed their cases in good faith and with reasonable cause when seeking summary judgment, directed verdict, or similar dispositive motions. The proposed changes would allow courts to make this determination when ruling on demurrers as well. If the court finds the case lacked good faith or reasonable cause, it must order the plaintiff to pay the defendant's reasonable and necessary defense costs, including attorney fees, expert witness fees, and related expenses.

The measure maintains existing procedural safeguards, requiring defendants to request cost recovery before jury discharge or judgment entry and ensuring plaintiffs receive notice and an opportunity to respond. Parties seeking these costs continue to waive their right to pursue separate malicious prosecution damages, though they retain the ability to file malicious prosecution actions. The provisions apply specifically to cases under the Government Claims Act and civil actions for indemnity or contribution.

Key Dates

Next Step
Referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
Next Step
Senate Committee
Referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
Hearing has not been scheduled yet
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Placed on suspense file
Senate Judiciary Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Judiciary Hearing
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar
Vote on Assembly Floor
Assembly Floor
Vote on Assembly Floor
AB 859 Macedo Consent Calendar Second Day Regular Session
Assembly Judiciary Hearing
Assembly Committee
Assembly Judiciary Hearing
Do pass. To Consent Calendar
Introduced
Assembly Floor
Introduced
Read first time. To print.

Contacts

Profile
Anna CaballeroD
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Tim GraysonD
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Megan DahleR
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Kelly SeyartoR
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Aisha WahabD
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
0 of 8 row(s) selected.
Page 1 of 2
Select All Legislators
Profile
Anna CaballeroD
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Tim GraysonD
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Megan DahleR
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Kelly SeyartoR
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Aisha WahabD
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Alexandra MacedoR
Assemblymember
Bill Author
Profile
Christopher CabaldonD
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Laura RichardsonD
Senator
Committee Member

Get Involved

Act Now!

Email the authors or create an email template to send to all relevant legislators.

Introduced By

Alexandra Macedo
Alexandra MacedoR
California State Assembly Member
40% progression
Bill has passed all readings in its first house and is ready to move to the other house (4/21/2025)

Latest Voting History

July 7, 2025
PASS
Senate Committee
Senate Appropriations Hearing
AyesNoesNVRTotalResult
6017PASS

Key Takeaways

  • Expands the ability of defendants to recover legal costs when opposing parties file cases without good faith.
  • Allows courts to award defense costs when granting demurrer motions that dismiss baseless claims.
  • Requires courts to determine if plaintiffs filed their cases with reasonable cause before awarding costs.
  • Covers attorney fees, expert witness costs, and consulting expenses in defense cost awards.

Get Involved

Act Now!

Email the authors or create an email template to send to all relevant legislators.

Introduced By

Alexandra Macedo
Alexandra MacedoR
California State Assembly Member

Summary

Assembly Member Macedo's civil procedure reform measure expands defendants' ability to recover legal costs when facing lawsuits filed without merit, adding demurrer objections to the existing framework for defense cost recovery in California civil proceedings.

Under current law, defendants in Government Claims Act cases and civil actions for indemnity or contribution can petition courts to evaluate whether plaintiffs filed their cases in good faith and with reasonable cause when seeking summary judgment, directed verdict, or similar dispositive motions. The proposed changes would allow courts to make this determination when ruling on demurrers as well. If the court finds the case lacked good faith or reasonable cause, it must order the plaintiff to pay the defendant's reasonable and necessary defense costs, including attorney fees, expert witness fees, and related expenses.

The measure maintains existing procedural safeguards, requiring defendants to request cost recovery before jury discharge or judgment entry and ensuring plaintiffs receive notice and an opportunity to respond. Parties seeking these costs continue to waive their right to pursue separate malicious prosecution damages, though they retain the ability to file malicious prosecution actions. The provisions apply specifically to cases under the Government Claims Act and civil actions for indemnity or contribution.

40% progression
Bill has passed all readings in its first house and is ready to move to the other house (4/21/2025)

Key Dates

Next Step
Referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
Next Step
Senate Committee
Referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
Hearing has not been scheduled yet
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Appropriations Hearing
Placed on suspense file
Senate Judiciary Hearing
Senate Committee
Senate Judiciary Hearing
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with the recommendation: To Consent Calendar
Vote on Assembly Floor
Assembly Floor
Vote on Assembly Floor
AB 859 Macedo Consent Calendar Second Day Regular Session
Assembly Judiciary Hearing
Assembly Committee
Assembly Judiciary Hearing
Do pass. To Consent Calendar
Introduced
Assembly Floor
Introduced
Read first time. To print.

Latest Voting History

July 7, 2025
PASS
Senate Committee
Senate Appropriations Hearing
AyesNoesNVRTotalResult
6017PASS

Contacts

Profile
Anna CaballeroD
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Tim GraysonD
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Megan DahleR
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Kelly SeyartoR
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
Profile
Aisha WahabD
Senator
Committee Member
Not Contacted
Not Contacted
0 of 8 row(s) selected.
Page 1 of 2
Select All Legislators
Profile
Anna CaballeroD
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Tim GraysonD
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Megan DahleR
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Kelly SeyartoR
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Aisha WahabD
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Alexandra MacedoR
Assemblymember
Bill Author
Profile
Christopher CabaldonD
Senator
Committee Member
Profile
Laura RichardsonD
Senator
Committee Member