California civil procedure divides judicial remedies into two distinct categories:
(1) civil actions, and
(2) special proceedings of a civil nature.
This distinction is statutory, fundamental, and determines which procedural rules apply at every stage of litigation.
This article explains the concept, differences, similarities, and practical implications for lawyers litigating in California.
1. Statutory Definitions
Civil Action — the “Ordinary Proceeding”
A civil action is defined by the California Code of Civil Procedure as the ordinary proceeding in which one party prosecutes another for the declaration, enforcement, or protection of a right, or for the redress or prevention of a wrong (CCP §§ 22, 30).
A civil action typically arises out of:
- an obligation (CCP § 25–26), or
- an injury (CCP §§ 27–29).
Pleadings in civil actions follow the standard structure:
- complaint
- answer
- demurrer
- cross-complaint
- discovery
- trial
- appeal
Civil actions are governed exclusively by Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP §§ 307–1062.20).
This rule is explicitly confirmed in the treatise .
2. Special Proceedings — Every Other Civil Remedy
Every civil remedy that is not a civil action is, by statutory definition, a special proceeding (CCP § 23).
Special proceedings exist because some disputes require unique, expedited, or simplified processes that differ from ordinary litigation. Examples include (all listed in the treatise pages 2–3) :
Common Special Proceedings in California
- Mandate, prohibition, certiorari (CCP § 1067 et seq.)
- Unlawful detainer / forcible detainer (CCP § 1159 et seq.)
- Eminent domain (CCP § 1230.010 et seq.)
- Contempt (CCP § 1209 et seq.)
- Arbitration confirmations and petitions (CCP § 1280 et seq.)
- Family law proceedings (Family Code § 200 et seq.)
- Probate proceedings (Probate Code § 7000 et seq.)
Each special proceeding is governed primarily by its own enabling statute, not by general rules for civil actions.
3. Governing Law: The Key Distinction
The core distinction is procedural:
Civil Actions
- Governed by Part 2 of the CCP
- Standard rules: pleadings, motions, discovery, judgment, appeals
- Examples: torts, contracts, property disputes
Special Proceedings
- Governed by specific statutes creating the proceeding
- Part 2 rules apply only when:
- the statute explicitly states that both “civil actions” and “special proceedings” are covered, or
- the enabling statute incorporates Part 2 rules (treatise page 3)
This means that you cannot automatically apply Code of Civil Procedure rules designed for civil actions to a special proceeding, unless the legislature clearly intended it.
4. Special Proceedings vs. Provisional Remedies
Many practitioners confuse special proceedings with provisional remedies such as:
- Attachment
- Claim and delivery
- Temporary restraining order / preliminary injunction
- Receivership
- Deposit in court
However, as the treatise clearly states (page 2) :
“Special proceedings should not be confused with provisional remedies.”
Provisional remedies are ancillary to a civil action or special proceeding; they are not standalone judicial remedies.
5. Procedural Differences: Why They Matter
Pleadings
- Civil actions start with complaint → summons → answer.
- Special proceedings start with the initiating document required by statute:
- petition,
- application,
- verified statement,
- order to show cause, etc.
Timelines
Special proceedings often have shortened deadlines, e.g.,
- UD trials within 20 days
- Mandamus briefing schedules set by the court
- Probate objections by statutory deadline
Discovery
Discovery in civil actions is robust.
In special proceedings, discovery may be limited or unavailable unless the statute grants it.
Appeals
Civil actions follow the appeal rules under CCP § 904.1.
Special proceedings often have unique appellate routes or deadlines.
6. Similarities Between Civil Actions and Special Proceedings
Although governed differently, they share structural similarities:
Both are civil judicial remedies
Both are intended to adjudicate private rights (treatise page 1).
Both may involve:
- court filings,
- service of process,
- hearings,
- evidentiary submissions,
- provisional remedies,
- judgments or orders,
- appeals (though under different provisions).
Both can result in binding final judgments
Even if the pathway differs, the end result—an enforceable court order—is the same.
7. Practical Guidance for Attorneys
1. Identify the proceeding immediately
The first question in any representation should be:
Is this an ordinary civil action or a special proceeding?
This determines:
- deadlines
- available motions
- applicable rules
- appeal rights
- capacity for discovery
2. Never assume Part 2 CCP rules apply
Unless incorporated, they do not apply to special proceedings.
3. Read the enabling statute first
For any special proceeding, the enabling statute is the “mini-code” that controls the entire process.
4. Remember that remedies differ
A mandamus petition does not seek damages.
A UD action cannot be joined with unrelated claims.
Probate petitions are not “complaints.”
Conclusion
In California, the distinction between civil actions and special proceedings is statutory, structural, and critical for procedural compliance. Civil actions follow the standard litigation model; special proceedings follow the unique statutory framework that created them.
Understanding this difference ensures:
- correct pleadings
- correct motions
- correct deadlines
- avoidance of fatal procedural errors
The authoritative explanation in California Forms of Pleading and Practice—Annotated § 2.05 confirms these principles and provides a reliable roadmap for practitioners handling either type of remedy in California courts.