In California, a referee can be appointed to help resolve disputes if both parties agree in writing or if a contract specifies using a referee. This referee can decide on issues of fact or law and report the findings to the court. Additionally, the court must send details about referee appointments to the presiding judge, and the Judicial Council was tasked with collecting and reporting information about these referees until 2004.

This law explains when and how a court can appoint a referee to help with specific parts of a legal case if the parties don't agree to the appointment. Referees can be appointed for different reasons, like examining long, detailed accounts, helping with discovery disputes, or providing information necessary for the court's decisions. If a referee is appointed, it must be in writing and include reasons for the appointment and costs involved. Parties who can't afford these costs may not have to pay, depending on certain findings. The law also specifies how to handle disqualifying a referee and affects how courts manage certain procedural tasks related to appointing referees.

This law explains how referees are chosen for court cases. First, the parties can agree on who the referee should be, but there can't be more than three. If they can't agree, each side suggests up to three people, and the court picks from those options. If no one suggests anyone, the court selects a referee or a court commissioner. It also clarifies that just because parties participate in this process, they don't lose their right to object to the referee later on for certain reasons.

This law is about the government's intention to closely examine the practice of using referees to handle discovery disputes in legal cases. It requires the Judicial Council to gather data from trial courts about how often referees are used, how much they cost, and how much time they spend on these cases. The Judicial Council must then report this information to the Legislature by July 1, 2003.

If someone is appointed as a referee in a legal case, the other party can object for several reasons. These include the referee lacking qualifications similar to a juror, having close family ties to either party or connected judges, having professional or financial relationships with either party, previously being involved in the case as a juror or witness, having a personal interest in the outcome, already having an opinion about the case, or showing any bias or animosity towards any party involved.

This law says if you're involved in a legal case mentioned in Article 8 of the Government Code, you can challenge the appointment of a referee if you believe they don't have the right expertise for the case's specific topic.

If someone has a problem with a court's appointment of a referee or the reference itself, they need to state their objections in writing, and the court—not the referee—will handle these concerns.

When a court assigns a referee or commissioner to handle a part of a case, these individuals must usually provide a written decision within 20 days after everything has been submitted. If two sides in a case agree to appoint someone as referee under Section 638, they report as both sides have agreed and the court has approved. For referees assigned under Section 639, they must include their findings, time spent, fees charged, and who should pay these fees in their report. This report is shared with all parties involved, who then have 10 days to file any objections, unless the court sets a different deadline. The court will review all objections and responses before making final orders. The court always retains the ability to change, ignore, or adjust the referee's recommendations whenever necessary.

In California, when both parties agree, a referee can make a decision that has the same power as a court decision. However, if the reference isn't agreed upon by both parties, the referee's decision is just a suggestion. The court can choose to follow the referee's advice, fully or partially, after reviewing it and any objections.

If a referee or commissioner makes a decision, you can challenge it and have it reviewed just as you would with a court decision. When they report facts, their decision is treated like a special finding by a jury.

This law talks about how the fees for a referee, which is someone appointed to help the court make a decision, are handled. If the referee is appointed under one specific rule (Section 638), the involved parties decide how to pay the fees, and if they can't agree, the court gets involved to decide. If the referee is appointed under another rule (Section 639), after checking the parties' ability to pay, the court can order them to pay the referee's fees in a way that seems fair, which can mean dividing the fees among the parties. Importantly, when it mentions 'parties,' it does not mean the lawyers involved.

This law requires the Judicial Council to create the necessary court rules to put this chapter into action.