California summary judgment: the 81/20/11 schedule and the traps around it

Federal summary judgment counts forward from the close of discovery. California counts backward from the hearing date, and the hearing date is itself constrained by the trial date. Getting one number wrong moves everything.

The three numbers

81 days' notice. CCP 437c(a)(2): "Notice of the motion and supporting papers shall be served on all other parties to the action at least 81 days before the time appointed for hearing."

20 days to oppose. CCP 437c(b)(2): "An opposition to the motion shall be served and filed not less than 20 days preceding the noticed or continued date of hearing, unless the court for good cause orders otherwise."

11 days to reply. CCP 437c(b)(4): "A reply to the opposition shall be served and filed by the moving party not less than 11 days preceding the noticed or continued date of hearing, unless the court for good cause orders otherwise."

All three are measured against the hearing. Note "or continued" in the opposition and reply provisions — if the hearing moves, those dates move with it.

The 81-day figure is current; it replaced a 75-day period, and material written before 2025 may still say 75.

Service-method add-ons apply to the 81 days

CCP 437c(a)(2) continues:

If the notice is served by mail, the required 81-day period of notice shall be increased by 5 days if the place of address is within the State of California, 10 days if the place of address is outside the State of California but within the United States, and 20 days if the place of address is outside the United States. If the notice is served by facsimile transmission, express mail, or another method of delivery providing for overnight delivery, the required 81-day period of notice shall be increased by two court days.

These extend the notice period, which pushes the earliest possible hearing date further out. They are written into Section 437c itself, so they don't depend on CCP 1013.

CCP 437c(b)(6) carves the opposition and reply out of the ordinary service-extension machinery, excepting CCP 1005(c) as to the method of service of those papers.

Two outer boundaries

Not before 60 days after appearance. CCP 437c(a)(1): the motion may be made "at any time after 60 days have elapsed since the general appearance in the action or proceeding of each party against whom the motion is directed" — or earlier if the court so directs, with or without notice, on good cause shown.

Heard no later than 30 days before trial. CCP 437c(a)(3): "The motion shall be heard no later than 30 days before the date of trial, unless the court for good cause orders otherwise."

Working backwards from a trial date: the hearing must be at least 30 days before trial, and notice must be served at least 81 days before that hearing. That is a minimum of 111 days between service of the motion and trial, before any service add-on.

CCP 437c(a)(3) also states something worth knowing separately: "The filing of the motion shall not extend the time within which a party must otherwise file a responsive pleading." A summary-judgment motion is not a substitute for an answer.

One motion

CCP 437c(a)(4): "A party shall not bring more than one motion for summary judgment against an adverse party to the action or proceeding. This limitation does not apply to motions for summary adjudication."

CCP 437c(a)(5) provides the exception: on motion or application and a showing of good cause, the court may grant leave for an additional motion, with notice and supporting papers served under subdivision (a)(2) — the full 81 days again.

The separate statement, both ways

The moving party's. CCP 437c(b)(1): the supporting papers "shall include a separate statement setting forth plainly and concisely all material facts that the moving party contends are undisputed," each followed by a reference to the supporting evidence. "The failure to comply with this requirement of a separate statement may in the court's discretion constitute a sufficient ground for denying the motion."

The opposing party's. CCP 437c(b)(3): the opposition papers include a separate statement responding to each material fact the moving party contends is undisputed, indicating agreement or disagreement, and setting out plainly and concisely any other material facts the opposing party contends are disputed — each followed by a reference to supporting evidence. "Failure to comply with this requirement of a separate statement may constitute a sufficient ground, in the court's discretion, for granting the motion."

Symmetrical wording, opposite consequences. The separate statement is the one formal requirement in Section 437c whose omission is expressly linked to losing.

Nothing new in reply

CCP 437c(b)(4): the reply "shall not include any new evidentiary matter, additional material facts, or separate statement submitted with the reply and not presented in the moving papers or opposing papers."

Evidentiary objections

CCP 437c(b)(5): "Evidentiary objections not made at the hearing shall be deemed waived."

Made at the hearing — which is why written objections are ordinarily preserved orally as well.

When you need discovery to oppose

CCP 437c(h):

If it appears from the affidavits submitted in opposition to a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication, or both, that facts essential to justify opposition may exist but cannot, for reasons stated, be presented, the court shall deny the motion, order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or discovery to be had, or make any other order as may be just.

Two features distinguish this from the federal analogue. The court "shall" do one of the three listed things — the statute doesn't leave the court free to simply grant the motion. And the application "may also be made by ex parte motion at any time on or before the date the opposition response to the motion is due," which gives a route that doesn't require waiting for the hearing.

The requirement is an affidavit stating reasons — what facts are essential, and why they can't be presented now.

CCP 437c(i) backs it: if, after granting a continuance for specified additional discovery, the court determines the moving party "has unreasonably failed to allow the discovery to be conducted," the court shall grant a further continuance or deny the motion. The subdivision doesn't limit a party's ability to compel discovery under the Civil Discovery Act.

Summary adjudication

CCP 437c(f)(1): a motion for summary adjudication "shall be granted only if it completely disposes of a cause of action, an affirmative defense, a claim for damages, or an issue of duty."

CCP 437c(f)(2): it may be made by itself or as an alternative to summary judgment, and "shall proceed in all procedural respects as a motion for summary judgment" — same 81/20/11 schedule. A party may not move for summary judgment on issues asserted in a prior summary-adjudication motion that the court denied, unless it establishes newly discovered facts or circumstances or a change of law.

Counting it out

Working from a hearing on day 0:

Every one of those is "not less than," so the papers can go earlier. None of them can go later without the court ordering otherwise for good cause.

Where these rules live

• CCP 437c — Summary Judgment
• CCP 1005 — Notice of Motion
• CCP 1013 — Service by Mail; Extension of Time
• CCP 2016.040 — Meet and Confer Declaration

The separate-statement format requirements sit in the California Rules of Court, which the Judicial Council publishes. This page explains what the statutes say. It isn't legal advice.