Any party to an included action that supports coordination may serve and submit a written statement in support of the petition. Any response in support must be served and filed at least nine court days before the date set for hearing. If a party that supports coordination does not support the particular site or sites requested by the petitioner for the hearing on the petition for coordination, that party may request that a different site or sites be selected and include in his or her response the facts relied on in support thereof.
Rule 3.526.Response in support of petition for coordination
Division 4. Parties and Actions · Chapter 7. Coordination of Complex Actions · Article 3. Petitions and Proceedings for Coordination of Complex Actions · Last amended 2007 · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceRule 3.526 lets any party to an included action file a written statement supporting a petition for coordination, due at least nine court days before the hearing, and lets a supporting party who disagrees with the proposed hearing site ask for a different one.
Full Text of Rule 3.526
Plain-English Summary
A party does not have to stay silent just because it agrees with the petition. Rule 3.526 gives a party who supports coordination its own filing — a written statement backing the petition, due on the same nine-court-day deadline that applies to an opposition under Rule 3.525.
The rule also handles a narrower disagreement: a party might favor coordination itself while disliking where the petitioner wants the hearing held. Rather than forcing that party to file a bare opposition over a site dispute, Rule 3.526 lets it support the petition while asking for a different hearing site, and requires the response to state the facts behind that request.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who can file a response in support of a coordination petition?
Any party to an included action may serve and submit a written statement supporting the petition.
What is the filing deadline for a response in support?
Rule 3.526 requires the same nine-court-day deadline before the hearing that applies to an opposition under Rule 3.525.
What if a party supports coordination but wants a different hearing location?
That party may support the petition while requesting a different site or sites in its response, stating the facts relied on in support of the request.
Is filing a response in support of coordination required?
No. Rule 3.526 makes it optional — a supporting party “may” serve and submit a statement, not must.
Amendment History
Rule 3.526 amended effective January 1, 2007; adopted as rule 1526 effective January 1, 1974; previously amended effective January 1, 2005; previously amended and renumbered effective January 1, 2007.
Source & verification. Rule text is reproduced verbatim from
the Judicial Council of California. Adopted by the Judicial Council of California.
Last verified July 29, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: supporting a coordination petition californiacrc 3.526 response deadlinerequesting different coordination hearing sitewritten statement supporting coordination