In an action against a physician or surgeon, dentist, registered nurse, dispensing optician, optometrist, registered physical therapist, podiatrist, licensed psychologist, osteopathic physician and surgeon, chiropractor, clinical laboratory bioanalyst, clinical laboratory technologist, veterinarian, or a licensed hospital as the employer of any such person, based upon the person's alleged professional negligence, or for rendering professional services without consent, or for error or omission in the person's practice, if the answer pleads that the action is barred by the statute of limitations, and if any party so moves or the court upon its own motion requires, the issues raised thereby must be tried separately and before any other issues in the case are tried. If the issue raised by the statute of limitations is finally determined in favor of the plaintiff, the remaining issues shall then be tried.
§ 597.5.Bar of Statute of Limitations Tried Separately and Before Other Issues In Action Against Health Care Provider For Professional Negligence
Title 8. Of the Trial and Judgment In Civil Actions · Chapter 3. Issues—The Mode of Trial and Postponements · Last amended 1994 · Last verified July 28, 2026
In one sentenceSection 597.5 requires the statute-of-limitations defense in a professional negligence action against a physician, dentist, nurse, and several other listed health care providers or a hospital employing them to be tried separately and before any other issue whenever a party moves for that or the court orders it on its own motion.
Full Text of § 597.5
Plain-English Summary
This section applies § 597's separate-trial idea specifically to health care malpractice cases, and makes it more automatic. In an action against a physician, dentist, registered nurse, optometrist, physical therapist, podiatrist, psychologist, osteopathic physician, chiropractor, clinical laboratory professional, veterinarian, or a licensed hospital employing any of them, based on alleged professional negligence, treatment without consent, or an error or omission in practice, a pleaded statute-of-limitations defense must be tried separately and first — if any party moves for it, or the court requires it on its own motion.
If that limitations defense is finally decided in the plaintiff's favor, the case proceeds to the remaining issues. The structure mirrors § 597's bar-or-abatement procedure, but narrows the trigger to this specific defense and this specific category of defendants.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which defendants does § 597.5 cover?
Physicians, dentists, registered nurses, dispensing opticians, optometrists, registered physical therapists, podiatrists, licensed psychologists, osteopathic physicians and surgeons, chiropractors, clinical laboratory bioanalysts and technologists, veterinarians, and licensed hospitals employing any of them.
What triggers the separate trial of the limitations defense?
Any party's motion, or the court's own motion requiring it.
What happens if the plaintiff wins on the limitations issue?
The remaining issues in the case are then tried.
How is this different from the general special-defense procedure in § 597?
Section 597.5 is narrower — it applies only to the statute-of-limitations defense and only in professional negligence actions against the listed health care providers — but makes the separate trial available on any party's motion rather than only at the court's discretion.
Amendment History
Amended by Stats. 1993, Ch. 226, Sec. 5. Effective January 1, 1994.
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the Deering's California Codes Annotated / vLex. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 28, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: medical malpractice statute of limitations separate trial california