Internal prototype — noindexed, not linked from public navigation yet.

Cal. CCP § 1010.5

This is the official text of Cal. CCP § 1010.5, part of California’s Code of Civil Procedure — sets the procedural rules for civil lawsuits in California courts, including filing deadlines, discovery, and judgments.

Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.

Official statutory text

The Judicial Council may adopt rules permitting the filing of papers by facsimile transmission, both directly with the courts and through third parties. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the rules may provide that the facsimile transmitted document shall constitute an original document, and that notwithstanding Section 6159 of the Government Code or Title 1.3 (commencing with Section 1747) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, any court authorized to accept a credit card as payment pursuant to this section may add a surcharge to the amount of the transaction to be borne by the litigant to cover charges imposed on credit card transactions regarding fax filings between a litigant and the court.

If the Judicial Council adopts rules permitting the filing of papers by facsimile transmission, the consent of the Judicial Council shall not be necessary to permit the use of credit cards to pay fees for the filing of papers by facsimile transmission directly with the court, provided that the court charges a processing fee to the filing party sufficient to cover the cost to the court of processing payment by credit card.

Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site

Need a lawyer in California?

Find a California lawyer
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the Open US Law dataset (Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine (Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.