Table of Contents
San Francisco Superior Court
The San Francisco Superior Court is the state superior court that has jurisdiction over San Francisco City and the County of California. It is located at 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102. It first opened its doors on date December 9, 1997. In 1976, the Court of San Francisco facilitated the establishment of the San Francisco Grand jury Diversion Project, a nonprofit organization that supports the provision of alternative punishments for infractions and parking violations to divert petty offenders away from overpopulated courthouses.
San Francisco Superior Court Rules
According to California Rules of Court, the San Francisco Superior Court is pursuing public input on planned reforms to the Local Rules of Court.
● Rule Scope and Citation.
These rules are known and cited as the “Regional Rules of Court for the San Francisco” They apply to the new case San Francisco Superior Court (California). These rules are for different case numbers also known as “LRSF.” The California Rules of Court are alluded to as “CRC,” and the Code of Civil Procedure is referred to as “CCP.”
● Sanctions for Noncompliance with Rules
Any counsel, party signified by counsel, or self-represented litigant who fails to comply with any of the rules will, upon motion of a party or the Court, be subordinate to the sanctions outlined in CCP 575.2 as any other sanctions provided by statute or the CRC.
1) “Appear,” “appearance,” “attend,” and “attendance” include remote appearance as defined and authorized by CRC 3.672, unless otherwise restricted by law, local rules, or an order. This definition applies only in a civil case, as defined by CRC 3.672.
2) “BASF” is an abbreviation for California’s Licensing Board of San Francisco.
3) “Day” refers to a calendar day unless specified otherwise.
4) “Declaration” refers to either a declaration by CCP 2015.5 or an affidavit.
5) When the term “exempt” refers to a case, it refers to one that has been designated as involving exceptional cases under CRC 3.714. CRC 1.6 defines a “General Civil Case.”
6) The term “limited jurisdiction” is defined in CCP 86.
7) “Presiding Judge” includes the Presiding Judge’s designee.
8) A party who is not represented by counsel or attorneys is referred to as a “self-represented litigant,” “Proper,” or “Improper.”
9) “Unlimited jurisdiction” refers to minor alleges appeals and all cases not covered by CCP 86.
San Francisco Superior Court, California Administration.
This Court has as many departments as there are judicial officers. Presiding Judge, Law and Motion, Real Property Court, Adolescent, Lawbreaker, Traffic, Marriage And Divorce, Discovery, Probate, and Complex Civil are among the departments. The Presiding Judge will, from time to time, appoint the types of cases to be managed in the various courtrooms and the departments involved.
● Hours of operation
The Presiding Judge gets to decide the authoritative hours of the San Francisco Superior Court, which are posted at the clerk’s offices at each facility and on the Court’s website.
● Civil Courtroom Sessions
A daily case calendar will be displayed outside each Courtroom.
● Criminal Court Sessions
Calendars for the Criminal and Traffic divisions are posted outside the Court clerk’s office, the Hall of Justice, Room 101, and each Courtroom.
Local Committee on Bias Elimination
The Court is committed to providing equal justice by eradicating both explicit and implied bias in all court proceedings. In all courtroom proceedings, jurists and public court personnel must refrain from engaging in and prohibit others from participating in behavior that exhibits bias, including but not limited to bias based on ancestry, race, national origin, gender, sexual orientation or authenticity, spirituality, age, disability, marital status, or socioeconomic status, whether that bias is directed to Standard 10.20 of the Criteria of Judicial Administration (“SJA”).
Judicial officers must guarantee that all orders, verdicts, and judgments are based on sound judicial independence and the balancing of contending rights and interests and that prejudices or biases do not influence them.
Issues Concerning Justice and Public Service Statement:
The Court strives to provide the highest quality of services to all people who seek them.
Ensure that all users receive the highest quality of service from all court personnel while keeping in mind our community’s growing diversity and the changing needs of court users. Introduce modern methods of service delivery that use technology to ensure service quality and options for users who expect and prefer technology.
Make processes and policies fair, equitable, and understandable to guarantee public trust and confidence. Infrastructure for facilities. Provide and maintain safe, dignified, and functional facilities to meet the needs of San Francisco’s court users and judiciary system partners.
• Working to promote a new criminal courthouse and Juvenile Justice Center.
• Advocating for ongoing renovations and repairs required to keep the Juvenile Correctional Center and Hall of Justice facilities operational until they can be replaced.
• Collaborating with the Judicial Council to ensure the Civic Center Courthouse’s ongoing maintenance and effective use.
• An intention to reopen the children’s waiting rooms.
Concentrate on improving criminal case numbers sorting in collaboration with the Court’s Justice Partners to ensure unbiased, fair, and responsive disposition of criminal cases that benefit victims, defendants, and the public. Enhance the effectiveness and reliability of criminal court services for all parties and participants by developing better numerical disclosure and data management to aid in the planning and implementing of criminal court processes.
Maintain and expand ability-to-pay initiatives to lessen the impact of high traffic fines and pay low-income court participants.
Combined Family Court
Increase the quality of services delivered to families and youths by collaborating and innovating with the Court’s justice and civic groups. Continue to improve judicial access through technology and e-filing. When dealing with issues involving a child, including youth in the reliance and juvenile justice divisions, use trauma-informed principles, and encourage family-centered case resolutions that emphasize the inclusion of youths’ voices in decisions that affect their lives.
General Civil Cases
Review and improve case processing procedures as needed to ensure fair and efficient resolution of all civil cases by judges. Improve judicial, staff assignment, and information system efficiencies in limited and general jurisdiction civil cases. Expand the use of electronic filing and other electronic access features to case documents wherever possible.
Mental Health and Probate
Mental Health and Probate Ensure that everyone has equal access to the division’s services. Extend the use of technology to allow remote access to court services. Increase public access to court records where permitted by law, by expanding the use of electronic documents and expanding the online record database. Encourage general and specialized education and training for bench officers and staff as it is mandatory. Increase outreach to the community and stakeholders.
Court has specific requisites for probate documents case filings. For these filings, you have to present them physically, or you can submit mandatory eFiling /direct eFilings.
Keep improving facilities and jury program services to increase juror satisfaction so all can be on the same page. Concentrate on long-term improvements in how potential jurors are summoned and utilized.
Programs for Despite Resolution
Establish and promote innovative problem-solving programs and practices that encourage fair and just negotiated resolutions to cases like dissolution cases, small claims, etc.
Courts of Collaboration
Document the efficacy of its current programs (Drug, Behavioral Health, Social Action Center, Veterans Justice, Household Treatment, Juvenile Reentry, and Young Adult), evaluate the implementation process, and participate in stakeholder meetings for new programs. Educate the court and the community about collaborative courts’ concepts and effectiveness.
● Local Committee on Bias Elimination (“the Committee”)
In consultation with the Court’s Executive Committee and the Executive Director of BASF, the Presiding Judge shall appoint a standing committee of seven or more members, at least three of whom are not members of the Court. To ensure compliance with SJA, Standard 10.20(b)(1), the Court’s Executive Committee will pursue accolades for Committee members from minority, women’s, and LGBTQ bar associations and organizations representing people with disabilities. The Committee should conduct educational programs to eliminate bias and make recommendations to the Court’s Executive Committee on how to alleviate bias in the courtroom on an annual basis. According to SJA Standard 10.20(b)(3). . Complaints Procedure
Instead of punishing the person who is the filer of the complaint, the purpose of the complaint process is to educate to alleviate the problem. Standard 10.20(c) of the SJA(1). The Committee will create and implement an unofficial complaint procedure following SJA Standard 10.20. (c). All complaints must be submitted in writing. The Committee will develop a complaint form, which will be available on the Court’s website. Any person may file a complaint with the Current chief Judge or file to Judicial Executive Officer describing conduct by any respondent in courtroom proceedings which may constitute potential bias. Any complaint must be submitted to the Committee by the Hearing the case Judge or the Executive Officer within 14 days of its receipt. Unless stipulated by law, the Committee will maintain the confidentiality of the complainant, the aspect of the complaint, and any other interested parties.
1. The Committee must evaluate all complaints filed with the Court in conformity with the processes highlighted. If a majority of the Committee determines that a complaint raises a potential bias issue, the Committee must investigate the allegation, including attempting to contact the person accused of wrongdoing. If a Committee member is the subject of the objection or a percipient witness to the conduct, he or she may not participate in the investigation of the registered complaint. If any Committee member is the subject of the complaint or a percipient witness, that member is disqualified.
2. If the Committee determines that action is necessary, the Committee must take steps to enlighten the offending group to alleviate the problem.
3. Nothing in this complaint process limits anyone’s ability to file a complaint of malfeasance with the appropriate disciplinary body.
4. To the greatest extent possible and unless mandated by law, the Committee will not keep writ records of complaints received, but it will allow the gathering of information on types of claims or underlying anecdotes that may be useful for educational purposes.
Case initiating filings
Papers Format Case number 1.200, 2.100-2.119, and 3.1110-3.1116 are examples.
Complimentary Copies Any filed document that requires analysis, action, or signature must include for a new case.
Timing Parties must lodge courtesy copies of any papers as follows unless a different time limit is considered necessary in the local rules about a specific department or division.
Location Unless otherwise specified in the local rules for a specific department or division, parties must deliver the courtesy copies to the division where the matter will be heard.
Contents Any related documentation filed with the Papers must be included in the courtesy copies. If the Papers question the sufficiency of an existing pleading, the moving party must also provide a courtesy copy of that petition.