RulesofCivilProcedure.com Civil Procedure · Every State

§ 919.Trial Court's Discretion to Dispense With Or Limit Security Required

Title 13. Appeals In Civil Actions · Chapter 2. Stay of Enforcement and Other Proceedings · Enacted 1968 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 28, 2026

In one sentenceSection 919 lets the trial court, in its discretion, dispense with or limit the security this chapter otherwise requires when the appellant is an executor, administrator, trustee, guardian, conservator, or other person acting in someone else's right.

Full Text of § 919

Text size

The trial court may, in its discretion, dispense with or limit the security required by any section in this chapter, when the appellant is an executor, administrator, trustee, guardian, conservator or other person acting in another's right.

Plain-English Summary

The undertaking requirements running through this chapter assume an appellant with a personal stake and personal assets to secure a bond against. Section 919 recognizes that some appellants don't fit that picture — they're appearing as executors, administrators, trustees, guardians, conservators, or otherwise acting in a representative capacity for someone else's interests.

For those appellants, the trial court can dispense with the security altogether or limit how much is required, exercising the same kind of discretion it uses elsewhere in setting bond amounts. The point is to keep a fiduciary's personal resources, or the absence of them, from blocking an appeal taken on behalf of an estate, trust, or protected person.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who can benefit from § 919's reduced security rule?

An appellant who is an executor, administrator, trustee, guardian, conservator, or other person acting in another's right.

Does § 919 eliminate the undertaking requirement entirely?

The trial court can either dispense with the security altogether or limit it — the choice, and the extent, are within the court's discretion.

Why does this chapter treat representative-capacity appellants differently?

Because the bond requirements elsewhere in this chapter assume an appellant with personal assets to secure, which doesn't fit someone appealing solely on behalf of an estate, trust, or protected person.

Amendment History

Added by Stats. 1968, Ch. 385.

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: ccp 919 fiduciary appeal bond reducedexecutor administrator trustee appeal security californiawaive appeal bond guardian conservator california