Loading…
The First Amended General Order re: Use of Electronic Recording Equipment (October 2, 2025) is rescinded: on August 10, 2026 the California Supreme Court (S288176) directed meaningful access for indigent litigants, upon request, to an official verbatim record, including by electronic recording when no official reporter is available; the court follows that mandate.
California > First Appellate District > Contra Costa County > Superior Court of California, County of Contra Costa
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA DATE: AUGUST 11, 2026 JUDGE: HON. CHRISTOPHER R. BOWEN DEPARTMENT 1 COURT CLERK: CAROLINE RUARO UNREPORTED ORDER RESCINDING FIRST AMENDED GENERAL ORDER RE: USE OF ELECTRONIC RECORDING EQUIPMENT On October 2, 2025, the Court issued its First Amended General Order re: Use of Electronic Recording Equipment. That order set forth standards for activation of electronic recording in specific cases based on the implications to fundamental rights or liberty interests. On August 10, 2026, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Family Violence Appellate Project v. Superior Court (August 10, 2026, S288176), directing this Court to “provide indigent litigants, upon request, with meaningful access in all cases to an official verbatim record of proceedings, including by means of electronic recording if an official reporter or official reporter pro tempore is unavailable.” Accordingly, the First Amended General Order re: Use of Electronic Recording Equipment is RESCINDED. The Court shall follow the mandate of the California Supreme Court in its use of electronic recording. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 11, 2026 HON. CHRISTOPHER R. BOWEN Presiding Judge of the Superior Court Contra Costa County
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA DATE: AUGUST 11, 2026 JUDGE: HON. CHRISTOPHER R. BOWEN DEPARTMENT 1 COURT CLERK: CAROLINE RUARO UNREPORTED ORDER RESCINDING FIRST AMENDED GENERAL ORDER RE: USE OF ELECTRONIC RECORDING EQUIPMENT On October 2, 2025, the Court issued its First Amended General Order re: Use of Electronic Recording Equipment. That order set
Reviewer note: Transcribed 2026-10-08 (California T4 Contra Costa build 2026-10-08) by eye from BenchPath custody ca/t4/ca-contra-costa/docs/general/combined-standing-orders-8-11-2026.pdf (the court's “Appendix A: Standing Orders”, “Revised August 11, 2026”, as fetched 2026-10-08; 14177357 bytes, sha256 50e61603361f0c413700512b6bb1a4d78d849a061bcc1e6d3ec3dcb30fda7c49; 48 pages, scanned) - Standing Order 1.8, PDF page 14: read on the page images rendered at 200 dpi, each doubtful mark on a crop at 400 dpi; checked against three machine readings never published (RapidOCR on each whole page, the file's own text layer where a page has one, RapidOCR on each printed line): every 6-word window of the transcription looked up and each span no reading holds read again on the page image (vision/check-log.md). The compilation's label, the clerk's filed stamps, the signatures and the pleading paper's line numbers are not part of the text; the transcription's closing note, which describes them, is not published. Review note: The clerk's name in the filed stamp is blurred and not transcribed. The Notice of Availability of Court Reporting Services (rev. 3/23/26, carded) still cites the December 30, 2024 order of the Presiding Judge on electronic recording, whose first amended version (October 2, 2025) this order rescinds.
Standing order of the 109th Judicial District Court for every pending or later-filed case in Andrews, Winkler and Crane Counties: any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in a case must, before using AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the court's certification form stating that all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative AI were verified as accurate by a human through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and acknowledging responsibility and potential sanctions for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply. Effective immediately; in effect until rescinded or replaced.
Standing order of the 109th Judicial District Court for every pending or later-filed case in Andrews, Winkler and Crane Counties: any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in a case must, before using AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the court's certification form stating that all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative AI were verified as accurate by a human through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and acknowledging responsibility and potential sanctions for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply. Effective immediately; in effect until rescinded or replaced.