Cal. FAM § 2451
This is the official text of Cal. FAM § 2451, part of California’s Family Code — governs marriage, divorce, child custody and support, domestic violence protections, and adoption. This particular section falls under Division 6, “Nullity, Dissolution, and Legal Separation.”
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
(a) A court-ordered family centered case resolution plan must be in conformance with due process requirements and may include, but is not limited to, all of the following:
(1) Early neutral case evaluation.
(2) Alternative dispute resolution consistent with the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 3181.
(3) Limitations on discovery, including temporary suspension pending exploration of settlement. There is a rebuttable presumption that an attorney who carries out discovery as provided in a family centered case resolution plan has fulfilled his or her duty of care to the client as to the existence of community property.
(4) Use of telephone conference calls to ascertain the status of the case, encourage cooperation, and assist counsel in reaching agreement. However, if the court is required to issue an order other than by stipulation, a hearing shall be held.
(5) If stipulated by the parties, modification or waiver of the requirements of procedural statutes.
(6) A requirement that any expert witness be selected by the parties jointly or be appointed by the court. However, if at any time the court determines that the issues for which experts are required cannot be settled under these conditions, the court shall permit each party to employ his or her own expert.
(7) Bifurcation of issues for trial.
(b) This section does not provide any additional authority to the court to appoint experts beyond that permitted under other provisions of law.
(c) The Judicial Council shall, by January 1, 2012, adopt a statewide rule of court to implement this section.
(d) The changes made to this section by the act adding this subdivision shall become operative on January 1, 2012.
(1) Early neutral case evaluation.
(2) Alternative dispute resolution consistent with the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 3181.
(3) Limitations on discovery, including temporary suspension pending exploration of settlement. There is a rebuttable presumption that an attorney who carries out discovery as provided in a family centered case resolution plan has fulfilled his or her duty of care to the client as to the existence of community property.
(4) Use of telephone conference calls to ascertain the status of the case, encourage cooperation, and assist counsel in reaching agreement. However, if the court is required to issue an order other than by stipulation, a hearing shall be held.
(5) If stipulated by the parties, modification or waiver of the requirements of procedural statutes.
(6) A requirement that any expert witness be selected by the parties jointly or be appointed by the court. However, if at any time the court determines that the issues for which experts are required cannot be settled under these conditions, the court shall permit each party to employ his or her own expert.
(7) Bifurcation of issues for trial.
(b) This section does not provide any additional authority to the court to appoint experts beyond that permitted under other provisions of law.
(c) The Judicial Council shall, by January 1, 2012, adopt a statewide rule of court to implement this section.
(d) The changes made to this section by the act adding this subdivision shall become operative on January 1, 2012.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Dealing with a divorce matter in California?
See all California Divorce lawyers
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.