The coordination trial judge may at any time remand a coordinated action or any severable claim or issue in that action to the court in which the action was pending at the time the coordination of that action was ordered. Remand may be made on the stipulation of all parties or on the basis of evidence received at a hearing on the court’s own motion or on the motion of any party to any coordinated action. No action or severable claim or issue in that action may be remanded over the objection of any party unless the evidence demonstrates a material change in the circumstances that are relevant to the criteria for coordination under Code of Civil Procedure section 404.1. If the order of remand requires that the action be transferred, the provisions of rule 3.543(c)–(e) are applicable to the transfer. A remanded action is no longer part of the coordination proceedings for purposes of the rules in this chapter.
Rule 3.542.Remand of action or claim
Division 4. Parties and Actions · Chapter 7. Coordination of Complex Actions · Article 4. Pretrial and Trial Rules for Complex Coordinated Actions · Last amended 2007 · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceRule 3.542 lets the coordination trial judge send a coordinated action, or a severable claim or issue within it, back to the court where the case was pending before coordination, whether by stipulation or after a hearing, but bars remand over a party’s objection absent a material change in the circumstances that justified coordination.
Full Text of Rule 3.542
Plain-English Summary
Coordination is not necessarily permanent for every case swept into it. Rule 3.542 lets the coordination trial judge remand — send back — a coordinated action, or just a severable claim or issue inside it, to the court where the case was pending before coordination began, at any point in the proceeding.
Getting there takes either agreement or evidence. All parties can stipulate to remand, or the trial judge can order it based on evidence received at a hearing, whether the judge raised the question on its own or a party moved for it. When a party objects, the bar rises: the judge cannot remand over that objection unless the evidence shows the circumstances relevant to the criteria for coordination under Code of Civil Procedure section 404.1 have materially changed since coordination was ordered.
Remand is not the same as termination. If sending the case back requires an actual transfer, the transfer mechanics in Rule 3.543(c) through (e) take over from there, and once the process is complete, the remanded action drops out of the coordination proceeding entirely for purposes of this chapter’s rules.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a coordinated action be sent back to its original court?
Yes. The coordination trial judge may remand a coordinated action, or a severable claim or issue in it, to the court where it was pending before coordination.
What does a party need to show to remand a case over another party’s objection?
Evidence demonstrating a material change in the circumstances relevant to the criteria for coordination under Code of Civil Procedure section 404.1.
Is a hearing always required to remand a case?
No. Remand may be made on the stipulation of all parties, or based on evidence received at a hearing on the court’s own motion or a party’s motion.
What happens once an action is remanded?
If the remand requires a transfer, Rule 3.543(c)–(e) governs the transfer, and the remanded action is no longer part of the coordination proceeding for purposes of this chapter’s rules.
Amendment History
Rule 3.542 amended and renumbered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as rule 1542 effective January 1, 1974; previously amended effective January 1, 2005, and July 1, 2006.
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: remanding a coordinated action californiacrc 3.542 remand standardccp 404.1 material change coordinationsending case back to original court coordination