Cal. Codes » Evidence Code / DIVISION 3. GENERAL PROVISIONS / CHAPTER 1. Applicability of Code
California Codes

Cal. Evidence Code § 300 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Except as otherwise provided by statute, this code applies in every action before the Supreme Court or a court of appeal or superior court, including proceedings in such actions conducted by a referee, court commissioner, or similar officer, but does not apply in grand jury proceedings.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 50 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1970–2024 · leading case: People v. Cordova, 248 Cal. App. 4th 543 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Cordova, 248 Cal. App. 4th 543 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “”26 (Evid. Code, § 300 (§ 300); see id., § 105 [“ ‘Action’ includes a civil action and a criminal action.”
Sweetwater Union High Sch. Dist. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co., 434 P.3d 1152 (Cal. 2019). “( Evid. Code, § 300.) However, statutes allowing consideration of some statements in resolving pretrial motions provide an exception to the hearsay rule for purposes of the motion.”
In Re Scott, 61 P.3d 402 (Cal. 2003). · cites it 2× “" (Evid.Code, § 300.) Accordingly, it applies to this action.”
Bailey v. Superior Court, 568 P.2d 394 (Cal. 1977). · cites it 2× “* *** 6 It is urged that this definition of “writing” applies to a deposition because the Evidence Code is applicable “in every action” before any court (Evid. Code, § 300), 7 and a deposition is an integral part of an action in a trial court.”
Katie v. v. Superior Court, 2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5419 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “2d 1244 ]), and the Evidence Code applies in every action unless *595 otherwise provided by statute (Evid. Code, § 300). Accordingly, Evidence Code section 115 should control here.”
Fukuda v. City of Angels, 977 P.2d 693 (Cal. 1999). “(Evid. Code, § 300 [“Except as otherwise provided by statute, [the] code applies in every action before the .”
People v. Franz, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3788 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “” (Evid. Code, § 300; People v. Watkins, supra, 45 Cal.”
In Re Marriage of Iverson, 11 Cal. App. 4th 1495 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “(Evid. Code, § 300; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 1207; In re Marriage of Mehlmauer (1976) 60 Cal.”
United States v. Gerritsen, 571 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2009). “See Cal. Evid.Code § 300 (West 1995 & Supp.2009).”
City of Hesperia v. Lake Arrowhead Cmty. Servs. Dist., 250 Cal. Rptr. 3d 82 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019). “The City opposes the District's request. As we explain, we deny the District's motion for judicial notice and disregard the related argument in the District's reply brief.”
Sy First Fam. Ltd. P'ship v. Cheung, 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2307 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999). “(Evid. Code, § 300; Rice v. Brown (1951) 104 Cal.”
Jauregi v. Superior Court, 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4428 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “,” 13 If this command were not clear enough, the Law Revision Commission Comment to section 300 resolves any conceivable ambiguity in the statutory language; the Commission states that section 300 “makes the Evidence Code applicable to all proceedings conducted by California…”
Show all 50 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.