Loading…
Rule 12 (Rules 12.1 to 12.3): upon the filing of a petition for guardianship the Court shall order the appropriate level of guardianship investigation, the petitioner required to pay for it at a cost determined by the court, unless there has been approval of a fee waiver (12.1); 12.2 reserved (12.2); and the Bias Informal Complaint Policy - the Court shall ensure that courtroom proceedings are fair and impartial and refrain from and prohibit conduct that exhibits bias based on race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, socioeconomic status, disability, age, gender, or sexual orientation, an individual with a concern may submit a written Notice of Concern to the Presiding Judge or Court Executive Officer which identifies the courtroom participants and the conduct, the procedure intended to educate rather than discipline, the Court to protect confidentiality to the extent possible, legitimate advocacy exempt, and formal complaints sent about a judge to the Commission on Judicial Performance, about a commissioner or the Court Executive Officer to the Presiding Judge, about court staff or a court contractor to the Court Executive Officer, about an attorney to the State Bar of California and about a courtroom bailiff to the Plumas County Sheriff’s Office (12.3).
California > Third Appellate District > Plumas County > Superior Court of California, County of Plumas
RULE 12. MISCELLANEOUS 12.1 GUARDIANSHIP INVESTIGATIONS Upon the filing of a petition for guardianship, the Court shall order the appropriate level of guardianship investigation. Petitioner shall be required to pay for the guardianship investigation at a cost determined by the court, unless there has been approval of a fee waiver. 12.2 RESERVED 12.3 BIAS INFORMAL COMPLAINT POLICY This policy is intended to preserve the integrity and impartiality of the judicial system, the Court shall: (a) Ensure fairness. Ensure that courtroom proceedings are conducted in a manner that is fair and impartial to all of the participants. (b) Refrain from and prohibit biased conduct. In all courtroom proceedings, refrain from engaging in conduct and prohibit others from engaging in conduct that exhibits bias based on race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, socioeconomic status, disability, age, gender, or sexual orientation, including whether that bias is directed toward counsel, court personnel, witnesses, parties, jurors, or any other participants. Notice of Concern Process. If an individual has a concern about compliance with the mandates set forth in this policy by the Court or by any courtroom participant, then: (a) The individual may submit a written Notice of Concern to the Presiding Judge or Court Executive Officer, which identifies all courtroom participants and the specific behavior or conduct occurring in the courtroom of concern; (a) The intent of the Notice of Concern procedure is to educate all parties with the purpose of ameliorating the concern rather than disciplining the person who is the subject of the notice; (b) To the extent possible and unless disclosure is required by law, the Court shall protect the confidentiality of the noticing party, the person who is the subject of the notice, and other interested persons; (c) The focus of this Local Rule is on incidents of concern: (1) Bias based on race, religion ethnicity, national origin, socioeconomic status, disability, age, gender, or sexual orientation; (2) Whether that bias is directed toward counsel, court personnel, witnesses, parties, jurors, or any other participants; and (3) Where the incident does not warrant discipline but requires education and correction. (d) Courtroom activities constituting legitimate advocacy when matters of race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, socioeconomic status, disability, age, gender or sexual orientation which are relevant to issues in the courtroom proceeding are exempt from this Notice of Concern procedure. Formal Complaint Process 1. With respect to any incident that if substantiated would warrant discipline against a judge, the concerned individual may file a formal complaint with the Commission on Judicial Performance; 2. Nothing in this procedure in any way shall limit the ability of any person to submit a formal complaint of misconduct regarding any courtroom participant to the Commission on Judicial Performance or the appropriate disciplinary body. 3. A formal complaint about a courtroom participant should be sent as follows: A Superior Court Judge To: The Commission on Judicial Performance (CJP) 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400 San Francisco, California 94102 Website: https://cjp.ca.gov/file_a_complaint A Superior Court Commissioner or Court Executive Officer: To: Presiding Judge Plumas Superior Court 520 Main Streer., Rm 104 Quincy, CA 95971 A Member of Court Staff or Court Contractor TO: To: Court Executive Officer Plumas Superior Court 520 Main Street, Rm 104 Quincy, California 95971 An Attorney To: State Bar of California 100 Howard Street San Francisco, California 94105 Website: www.calbar.ca.gov/Public/Complaints-Claims A Courtroom Bailiff To: Plumas County Sheriff’s Office 1400 E. Main Street Quincy, California 95971
RULE 12. MISCELLANEOUS 12.1 GUARDIANSHIP INVESTIGATIONS Upon the filing of a petition for guardianship, the Court shall order the appropriate level of guardianship investigation. Petitioner shall be required to pay for the guardianship investigation at a cost determined by the court, unless there has been approval of a fee waiver. 12.2 RESERVED 12.3 BIAS INFORMAL COMPLAINT POLICY This policy is in
Reviewer note: Composed 2026-10-12 (California T4 Plumas build 2026-10-12) from BenchPath custody ca/t4/ca-plumas/docs/local-rules/local-rules-2026.pdf (the court's rule book, its cover “SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF PLUMAS LOCAL RULES OF COURT Effective July 1, 2026”, as fetched 2026-10-12; 1224627 bytes, sha256 3c2cc28bf533a918211db4c6240c158fce01c5569c8c175b91dbd61eb2fa07f2; 100 pages; this rule PDF pages 86 to 88, printed pages 77 to 79) with the shared verbatim composer (v2 reflow): the rules (PDF pages 10 to 88, printed 1 to 79) composed as one text and cut at the twelve rule headings - “RULE OF COURT NO. 1 GENERAL RULES”, “RULE OF COURT NO. 2 CIVIL LAW AND MOTION MATTERS”, “RULE 3. CASE MANAGEMENT” to “RULE 12. MISCELLANEOUS” (“Rule 11. Unlawful Detainers” as printed), each matched once as a whole line, each rule beginning a page - and Appendix “B”, the Appellate Division Local Rules (PDF pages 96 to 100), composed apart; the running header of every page (“Superior Court of California, County of Plumas”) and its page number (“1”; “Appendix “B” - 1”), each named and a whole line in its band, removed as chrome - 158 and 10 chrome lines; lines reflowed into the rules' paragraphs, each rule's heading, each numbered sub-rule (“1.4 TIMELY APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL AND REQUIRED NOTIFICATION:”), each lettered or numbered subdivision starting a line, a line in capitals ending its paragraph, and each history line (“(Effective ...)”, “(Amended ...)”) on a line of its own; the strike report (review/strike-report-2026-10-12.txt) finds no struck run on the book's 100 pages; 20 whitespace-only fixes (build/book-fixes.json: five lines rejoined - the two-line headings of Rule 3.7 and Rule 8, Rule 3.7(f)'s line wrapped inside its paragraph, and Rule 4.3(1)'s run-in list and Rule 10.6(6)'s reference wrapped at “(3)” and “(e)”, which the reflow took for labels; fifteen lines set apart - a row of Rule 4.3(2)'s trial binder table, three of Rule 6.17(b)(4)'s bulleted issues, Rule 10.2's excepted case categories one a line, row by row, left to right, and a Rule 12.3 addressee's heading from the next address); the vertical-gap, short-line, page-break, bold, false-break, fragment and row audits (custody file book_extra_audits.py; review/book-extra-audits-2026-10-12.txt and review/book-audits-after-fixes-2026-10-12.txt) list candidates read one by one (build/book_fixes.py) - the rest kept as printed (the lines ending at the court's web address, the run-in bold headings of Rules 5.3(c)(4) and 6.15(a), Rule 12.3's “To:” labels, the binder rows' stray words, the inner labels of Rules 1.9(g) and 6.15(c), Rule 12.3's two “(a)”); proof 1 (whitespace-only) and proof 2 (same character multiset as the text layer minus chrome) pass. The cover (PDF page 1), the table of contents (2 to 9, printed i to viii), the index (89 to 94, printed A to F) and Appendix “A” (the Certification of Attorney Competency form, 95) belong to no card. Review note: The book’s index lists “Electronic Recordings, Copies (Rule 12.2)”, while the rule prints “12.2 RESERVED”. Carried as printed: Rule 12.3’s two subdivisions “(a)” in its Notice of Concern Process and the address “520 Main Streer., Rm 104”.
Division XI: information forms for data processing (Rule 11.2); required action - action taken on all calendared cases and a future date always set (Rule 11.19); and pro tem judges - an attorney named as a plaintiff in a civil or small claims case may not sit as a judge pro-tem during the case or within six months following its resolution, nor one named as a defendant in two or more such cases (Rule 11.22). Rules 11.1, 11.3 to 11.5, 11.7 to 11.18, 11.20 and 11.21 are repealed, and Rule 11.6 (voluntary arbitration; see Local Rule 10.2) was repealed and renumbered.
Duval County's indigent-defense and magistration rules under the Texas Fair Defense Act (S.B. 7): who may be booked into the county jail and on what paper; arrest-case numbering; presentment to a magistrate within 48 hours (art. 15.16); the magistrate's warnings, counsel inquiry, interpreter duty, indigence determination and appointment of counsel within 24 hours of a request; the alternative appointment plan under art. 26.04(g)-(h) with annual applications, seven attorney categories (capital, first and second degree, third degree/state jail/misdemeanor, competency, appeals, post-conviction, extradition), CLE and experience standards, random rotation within each category, written acceptance within 48 hours, first contact by the end of the next working day, replacement and suspension of counsel, fee applications within five days of completing services and the compensation attachment ($500 pleas; $175/$150 hourly; $1,400 per jury-trial day; appellate caps); bail schedules by offense class with a personal bond office (fee $20 or 3%), pre-trial supervision and revocation hearings within two working days; arraignment settings and notice; repeal of conflicting rules.