California Rules of Court

California Rule of Court, rule 2.200 states: “An attorney or self-represented party whose mailing address, telephone number, fax number, or e-mail address (if it was provided under rule 2.111(1)) changes while an action is pending must serve on all parties and file a written notice of the change.” Thus, counsel has an obligation to file and serve all parties, in an action that involves counsel, with the Notice of Change of Address. (Cal. Rules of Ct., Rule 2.200.) Until such notice is filed and served on all parties, service directed to the address on file with the court is presumed valid. (Sweeting v. Murat (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 507, 513-514.)

Notice of Change of Address and Consolidated Cases

If cases become consolidated, a party that is serving a Notice of Change of Address must serve the notice on all parties in the consolidated case as opposed to only parties in the serving party’s original case. (See Ca. Rules of Ct., Rule 2.200.)

Notice of Change of Address and Excusable Neglect

A matter of inadvertence or excusable neglect may be held when Plaintiff serves Defense counsel's old address after Defense counsel had sent a Notice of Change of Address, i.e., it appears likely that Plaintiff's counsel failed to properly update its records after receiving the Notice of Change of Address. Such a defect would warrant a continuance to provide time for adequate service so that the opposition brief could be considered and so that Defendant could have time to prepare and file a proper reply brief. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 473(b).)

Related Issues

Electronic Service

If there are service issues that likely could have been avoided by parties entering into an agreement for electronic service under Code of Civil Procedure § 1010.6(a)(2) and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.253(b), the court may ask why parties have not entered into such an agreement.

Presumption of Receipt

Evidence Code Section 641 provides: “A letter correctly addressed and properly mailed is presumed to have been received in the ordinary course of mail.” A presumption of receipt is rebutted by testimony denying receipt. (Bear Creek Master Ass'n v. Edwards (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 1470, 1486.) However, the disappearance of the presumption does not mean there is insufficient evidence to support a finding of receipt of notice. (Craig v. Brown & Root, Inc. (2000) 84 Cal.App.4th 416, 421.) If the adverse party denies receipt, the presumption is gone from the case. But the trier of fact must then weigh the denial of receipt against the inference of receipt arising from proof of mailing and decide whether or not the letter was received. (Id. at p. 422; Bear Creek Master Ass'n v. Edwards, supra, at p. 1486.)

Judicial Council Form

Judicial Council Form MC-040 is for Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information.