Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California

2 rulings: Rojas v Cutsforth and Voit v Superior Court....the Courts ruled that a clerk "should" accept papers for filing if they comply with the Rules of Court even with "defects" and the clerk "should" file the papers and notify the filing party to correct the defects.....my question is, does the use of "should" as opposed to "shall" impose a mandatory duty or is the duty considered discretionary?

Asked on 5/01/13, 6:07 pm

2 Answers from Attorneys

Charles Perry Law Offices of Charles R. Perry
0 users found helpful
0 attorneys agreed

"Should" is not mandatory. Clerks, however, have generally got the message and follow the the court's recommendation.

Read more
5/01/13, 11:20 pm
Anthony Roach Law Office of Anthony A. Roach
0 users found helpful
0 attorneys agreed

It's discretionary. It can be a pain where your papers are correct, and the clerk thinks they are wrong, and then rejects them. That creates a hassle when you have to wait in line, as an attorney, just to speak to their supervisor.

Read more
5/02/13, 8:40 am

Related Questions & Answers

More General Civil Litigation questions and answers in California

Looking for something else?

Get Free Legal Advice

8782 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.

General Civil Litigation Legal Forms

Browse and download our attorney-prepared and up-to-date legal forms from $4.99

Find a Legal Form

Featured Attorneys

Timothy McCormickLibris Solutions - Dispute Resolution ServicesSan Francisco, CA
Anthony RoachLaw Office of Anthony A. RoachChatsworth, CA
Barry SteinDe Cardenas, Freixas, Stein & ZacharyMiami, FL
Find An Attorney

Are you an Attorney?

Earn additional revenue and grow your business. Join LawGuru Now