How to Fill Out California Form CIV-120 (w/Examples) + FAQs

California Form CIV-120 is the Judicial Council form titled Notice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service, and you fill it out by entering the case caption, checking the boxes that match the dismissal already entered by the clerk, attaching a file-stamped copy of the Request for Dismissal (CIV-110), and serving a signed copy on every other party to the lawsuit. This form is the official notice that tells the other side, “The case is over, here is the proof, the clock has now started on your deadlines.”

The problem CIV-120 solves is simple but high-stakes: when a plaintiff voluntarily ends a California civil lawsuit, every other party needs written, dated proof so they can calculate appeal windows, costs motions, attorney-fee motions under Code of Civil Procedure §1032, and statute-of-limitations refiling rights. According to the Judicial Council 2024 Court Statistics Report, more than 1.1 million civil cases are filed in California trial courts each year, and a large share end through voluntary dismissal rather than trial, which means CIV-120 is one of the most frequently filed end-of-case documents in the state.

Here is what you will learn in this guide:

📝 How to read every line, box, and field on Form CIV-120 the way a veteran clerk reads it.
⚖️ How CIV-120 fits with CIV-110 Request for Dismissal and the rules in California Rules of Court 3.1390.
🚫 The 7 most common mistakes that cause clerks to reject the form or judges to reopen a closed case.
👥 Real, named-person examples in personal injury, contract, small claims, family law, and unlawful detainer matters.
✅ A clean, do-this-now checklist plus 12 FAQs covering refiling, attorney fees, CCP §998 offers, and service rules.

What Form CIV-120 Actually Is

Form CIV-120 is a one-page Judicial Council form adopted for mandatory use under California Rules of Court Rule 3.1390. The plain-English purpose is to give every party in a civil lawsuit formal, written notice that the clerk has already entered a dismissal based on a separately filed Request for Dismissal (CIV-110). The form itself does not dismiss the case. The dismissal is created by CIV-110, entered by the clerk, and then announced to the world by CIV-120.

The consequence of skipping CIV-120 is real. Under Code of Civil Procedure §1019.5 and Rule 3.1390, parties get written notice of an order or ruling, and many post-dismissal deadlines (such as the 15-day deadline to file a Memorandum of Costs (MC-010) under California Rules of Court 3.1700) run from the date notice of entry is served. If you do not serve CIV-120 properly, you may unintentionally extend the other side’s window to file a costs memo or a motion for attorney fees against your client.

A common misconception is that filing CIV-110 alone is enough. It is not. Rule 3.1390 directs the party who requested the dismissal to serve a notice of entry on every other party, and CIV-120 is the standard tool for doing that. Veteran paralegals treat CIV-110 and CIV-120 as a matched set, prepared and walked into the clerk together.

A second misconception is that CIV-120 only applies to unlimited civil cases. The form is used across unlimited civil, limited civil, unlawful detainer, and many small claims matters, and it is also used in some family law and probate post-judgment dismissal scenarios when an underlying civil claim is being ended.

The Statutory and Rule Backbone

The legal authority for voluntary dismissal sits in Code of Civil Procedure §581, which lets a plaintiff dismiss with or without prejudice before the “commencement of trial,” subject to important limits. The notice-of-entry side sits in Rule 3.1390 and CCP §1019.5.

The consequence of misreading these statutes is harsh. In Lyons v. Wickhorst (1986) 42 Cal.3d 911, the California Supreme Court underscored that dismissals are powerful, case-ending tools and courts must follow the rules carefully. In Gogri v. Jack in the Box (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 255, the Court of Appeal made clear that timing rules around voluntary dismissals after a §998 offer directly affect costs and attorney-fee exposure.

For example, Maria, a small-business owner in Fresno, dismissed a contract case after settlement but never served CIV-120. Three months later her former opponent filed a memorandum of costs, arguing the 15-day deadline had not started because notice of entry was never served. Maria’s late CIV-120 cost her thousands in avoidable costs.

Federal Backdrop, Then California Nuance

There is no federal CIV-120. The closest federal analog is a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) notice or stipulation of dismissal in U.S. District Court. California chose a more structured approach, requiring its own statewide forms (CIV-110 and CIV-120) so any clerk in any county can process a dismissal the same way. The plain-English consequence is that California’s system is more form-driven, and missing a checkbox on CIV-120 can stall a case more than a missing line in a federal stipulation.

CIV-110 vs. CIV-120: The Matched Pair

Many self-represented litigants confuse CIV-110 and CIV-120. The plain-English difference is that CIV-110 asks the clerk to dismiss and CIV-120 tells everyone the dismissal happened. The consequence of mixing them up is filing the wrong form, getting it rejected, and missing a settlement deadline.

Feature	CIV-110 Request for Dismissal	CIV-120 Notice of Entry of Dismissal
Purpose	Asks the clerk to enter the dismissal	Notifies parties that dismissal was entered
Who signs	Plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney	Party giving notice (usually plaintiff)
Filed first?	Yes, filed first	Filed and served after entry
Authority	CCP §581	CRC 3.1390
Triggers cost deadlines	Indirectly	Yes, by service date

A real-world example: David, a Sacramento landlord, settled an unlawful detainer matter. He filed CIV-110 marked “with prejudice,” the clerk entered dismissal, and then he filed CIV-120 with a Proof of Service by First-Class Mail (POS-030) attached, mailing copies to the tenants’ attorney. That sequence locked in the deadlines and protected David’s right to recover prevailing-party costs.

A common misconception is that the CIV-120 “Proof of Service” section on the form replaces a separate POS-030 in every county. Some courts accept the built-in proof of service; others insist on a separate POS-030 or POS-040. Always check your county’s local rules before filing.

Section-by-Section Walkthrough of Form CIV-120

The form has a header, a body with checkboxes, a signature block, and a built-in proof of service. Each part has a job, and each job has consequences if you get it wrong. The official fillable PDF lives on the Judicial Council CIV-120 page.

Top-of-Page Caption (Attorney/Party, Court, Case Title, Case Number)

The caption block is the same as on every California civil form. You enter the attorney or self-represented party’s name, State Bar number (if any), address, phone, fax, email, and the party they represent. You then enter the superior court name, branch, and address, the case title (for example, Smith v. Acme Corp.), and the case number.

The plain-English explanation is that the caption tells the clerk which case file to put the document in. The consequence of an error is filing rejection or, worse, the clerk filing your CIV-120 in the wrong case, which can break the chain of notice.

For example, Priya, a paralegal at a Los Angeles firm, once mistyped a case number from “BC” to “BS,” causing the CIV-120 to be filed in a probate case. The civil court treated the dismissal as un-noticed for weeks. A common misconception is that the caption is a formality. It is not. It is the file’s GPS coordinates.

Item 1: TO All Parties and Their Attorneys of Record

Item 1 simply states that notice is being given to all parties and their attorneys of record. There is nothing to fill in here, but skipping or altering this language defeats the form’s purpose. The consequence of editing this line is that the form may no longer qualify as the mandatory CRC 3.1390 notice.

A real-world example: Anthony, a self-represented plaintiff in San Diego small claims, crossed out “and their attorneys of record,” thinking the defendant had no lawyer. The clerk accepted it, but when the defendant later retained counsel and challenged service, the cleanup motion took weeks.

Item 2: Date Dismissal Was Entered

You write the exact date the clerk entered the dismissal on the CIV-110, taken from the file-stamped copy. The plain-English consequence is that this date starts deadline clocks.

A common misconception is that you can use the date you signed CIV-110 or the date you mailed it. You cannot. Only the clerk’s entered date counts under CCP §581d, which says written dismissals signed by the court constitute judgments.

Item 3: Type of Dismissal (With or Without Prejudice)

You check whether the dismissal is with prejudice (the case cannot be refiled on the same claim) or without prejudice (the plaintiff may refile, subject to the statute of limitations). The consequence is enormous: a with prejudice dismissal is final and can support a res judicata defense in any later case.

For example, Jordan, a contractor, dismissed a mechanic’s-lien case “without prejudice” after a payment plan was signed. When the homeowner defaulted, Jordan refiled within the statute of limitations under CCP §337. Had he checked “with prejudice,” the second case would have been dead on arrival.

A common misconception is that “without prejudice” means “no consequences.” It does not. Under CCP §583.130, the statute of limitations is not tolled while the first case was pending in most situations.

Item 4: Scope of Dismissal (Entire Action, Specific Parties, or Specific Causes of Action)

You mark whether the dismissal covers the entire action, specific parties, or specific causes of action. Each option must mirror the boxes you checked on CIV-110. The consequence of a mismatch is that a clerk may reject the CIV-120 or a court may treat the notice as ineffective.

For example, Linda, an HR director, filed a wage-and-hour action with three causes of action, then dismissed only the breach-of-contract claim. Her CIV-120 had to specify that single cause of action; checking “entire action” would have wiped out the still-active claims.

Attachment of File-Stamped CIV-110

Most courts require you to attach a conformed (file-stamped) copy of CIV-110 to CIV-120. The plain-English reason is that the notice should travel with proof that the dismissal really was entered. The consequence of forgetting the attachment is a stack of confused phone calls from the other side and possible rejection at intake.

A common misconception is that an electronic file-stamp is not “real.” Under CRC 2.259, an electronically conformed copy is fully valid, and most courts now e-file by default.

Signature Block

The party giving notice or that party’s attorney signs and dates the form. The consequence of an unsigned CIV-120 is straightforward: it is not a valid notice. For example, Carlos, a paralegal, e-filed an unsigned CIV-120 for his attorney who was on vacation, and opposing counsel later argued no valid notice was ever served.

Built-In Proof of Service Section

The bottom of CIV-120 contains a proof of service by mail declaration. You list the names and addresses of every party served, the date of mailing, the place of mailing, and a non-party server signs under penalty of perjury. The consequence of an error here is that service can be voided, restarting deadlines or, in rare cases, undermining the dismissal’s practical effect.

A common misconception is that the plaintiff personally can sign the proof of service. Under CCP §1013a, the person who actually mails the notice must be at least 18 and not a party to the action.

Step-by-Step: How to Fill Out CIV-120 the Right Way

Here is a clean, in-order workflow that mirrors what experienced California civil clerks expect to see.

Confirm the clerk has already entered your CIV-110 dismissal and you have a file-stamped copy in hand.
Open the official fillable PDF on the Judicial Council forms site.
Complete the attorney/party caption exactly as it appears on CIV-110.
Enter the court name, branch, case title, and case number with no abbreviations the clerk does not use locally.
Enter the clerk-entered date in Item 2.
Check the same prejudice box you checked on CIV-110.
Check the same scope box (entire action, parties, or causes of action) you checked on CIV-110.
Attach the file-stamped CIV-110 to CIV-120.
Sign and date the form.
Have a non-party adult mail a copy to every other party at the address shown in the latest pleadings.
Have that non-party adult complete and sign the proof of service.
File the completed CIV-120, with proof of service, with the clerk by e-filing through your county’s e-filing portal or in person.

The consequence of skipping any step is delay, rejection, or unintended deadline shifts.

Three Realistic Scenarios with Named Examples

Below are the three most common CIV-120 fact patterns based on California civil practice. Each table is a 2-column scenario walkthrough.

Scenario 1: Personal Injury Settlement (Maria v. Rideshare Co.)

Maria settles a soft-tissue auto case after mediation and dismisses with prejudice.

What Maria Does	Resulting Effect
Files CIV-110 marked “with prejudice, entire action”	Clerk enters dismissal under CCP §581
Files CIV-120 with file-stamped CIV-110 attached	Triggers 15-day clock for costs memo (CRC 3.1700)
Has paralegal mail copies to defense counsel	Service date controls all post-dismissal deadlines
Receives settlement funds	Case is fully closed, refiling is barred

Scenario 2: Small Claims Payment Plan (Anthony v. Roommate)

Anthony sues a former roommate for an unpaid security deposit and accepts a payment plan.

What Anthony Does	Resulting Effect
Files CIV-110 “without prejudice”	Preserves right to refile if payments stop
Files CIV-120 with the entered date	Notifies former roommate the case is closed
Tracks statute of limitations under CCP §337	Knows refiling deadline if default occurs
Keeps file-stamped copies	Has proof for any later refiling

Scenario 3: Unlawful Detainer After Move-Out (David v. Tenants)

David, a landlord, gets the keys and dismisses the unlawful detainer.

What David Does	Resulting Effect
Files UD-105 -related dismissal via CIV-110	Ends the eviction action
Files CIV-120 promptly	Allows tenants to seek to seal record under CCP §1161.2
Serves CIV-120 by mail to tenants’ last address	Satisfies CRC 3.1390
Stores file-stamped CIV-110 and CIV-120	Protects against later wrongful-eviction claims

Mistakes to Avoid When Filing CIV-120

The following are the most common, most consequential CIV-120 errors seen across California superior courts.

Filing CIV-120 before the clerk enters CIV-110, which creates a notice of an event that has not happened, leading to clerk rejection.
Mismatching the prejudice box on CIV-110 and CIV-120, which can cause confusion about whether refiling is barred.
Mismatching the scope box, which can wipe out claims you intended to keep alive.
Forgetting to attach the file-stamped CIV-110, which leaves the other side guessing whether the dismissal really was entered.
Letting the plaintiff sign the proof of service, which violates CCP §1013a and can void service.
Using outdated party addresses, which can mean the other side never gets actual notice and later moves to set aside dismissal-related orders.
Skipping CIV-120 entirely after CIV-110 is entered, which leaves cost and fee deadlines under CRC 3.1700 unstarted.
Filing CIV-120 in the wrong case number, which can break the chain of notice and confuse the clerk.
Dismissing after a §998 offer without analyzing fee exposure, which can trigger expert-fee shifting under Gogri.
Assuming a “without prejudice” dismissal tolls the statute of limitations, which it generally does not under CCP §583.130.

Do’s and Don’ts for CIV-120

These rules come from years of California civil practice and align with the California Courts Self-Help Center.

Do confirm the clerk-entered date before drafting CIV-120, because this date controls deadlines.
Do attach a file-stamped CIV-110, because the notice is meaningless without proof of entry.
Do use a non-party adult server, because CCP §1013a requires it.
Do keep originals and conformed copies for at least the statute-of-limitations period, because refiling or enforcement may depend on them.
Do check your county’s local rules, because some courts require a separate POS-030.
Don’t edit or delete the form’s preprinted language, because CIV-120 is mandatory under CRC 3.1390.
Don’t sign your own proof of service, because party-served proofs are routinely rejected.
Don’t dismiss with prejudice if you may want to refile, because the case will be barred by res judicata.
Don’t wait weeks to file CIV-120 after the dismissal is entered, because deadlines you control may slip.
Don’t assume e-filing is optional, because most California superior courts now require it for represented parties under CRC 2.253.

Pros and Cons of Voluntary Dismissal via CIV-110/CIV-120

Voluntary dismissal is a powerful settlement tool, but it has trade-offs.

Pro: Ends the case quickly without trial, saving costs and stress.
Pro: Plaintiff usually keeps control of the timing under CCP §581.
Pro: Allows confidential settlement terms outside the public record.
Pro: Can preserve refiling rights if marked “without prejudice.”
Pro: Triggers prevailing-party cost analysis cleanly under CRC 3.1700.
Con: A “with prejudice” dismissal forever bars the same claim, a permanent consequence.
Con: Dismissal after a rejected §998 offer can trigger fee and cost shifting.
Con: The statute of limitations generally is not tolled, per CCP §583.130.
Con: A defendant may still pursue costs and fees as prevailing party under CCP §1032.
Con: Errors on CIV-120 can complicate enforcement of settlement terms.

Key Cases, Statutes, and Entities

The most important California authorities behind CIV-120 are statutes, rules, and a handful of appellate decisions.

Lyons v. Wickhorst (1986) 42 Cal.3d 911 limits a trial court’s power to dismiss as a sanction without considering less-severe options. The plain-English consequence is that judges cannot casually dismiss your case; if they do, CIV-120 is not the right tool, and you may have appellate rights.

Gogri v. Jack in the Box (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 255 addresses voluntary dismissals after a §998 offer. The consequence is that timing matters: dismissing too late can leave a plaintiff exposed to expert-witness fees and other §998 consequences.

Wells Properties v. Popkin (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1053 reinforces that voluntary dismissal under CCP §581 is largely a ministerial act, but only if done before key trial events. The consequence of dismissing after “commencement of trial” is losing the unilateral right to dismiss.

The key entities you will deal with are the superior court clerk, the Judicial Council of California, the opposing party and counsel, and any insurer funding a settlement. Each plays a different role: the clerk processes paperwork, the Judicial Council publishes the official forms, opposing counsel evaluates costs and fees, and insurers want clear written proof of dismissal before releasing funds.

County and E-Filing Nuances

Although CIV-120 is a statewide form, how you file it varies by county. Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, Sacramento, Alameda, and Santa Clara each maintain their own local rules and e-filing portals. The plain-English consequence is that a CIV-120 that flies through intake in one county can be rejected in another for a missing local cover sheet or a mismatched proof-of-service form.

For example, Priya files CIV-120 in Los Angeles Superior Court via the court’s official e-filing service providers and includes a separate POS-030 because LA prefers a standalone proof of service for many filings. In Sacramento, David uses the in-form proof of service and the filing is accepted without a separate POS-030.

A common misconception is that filing fees apply to CIV-120. Generally, no fee is charged for filing a notice of entry, although unusual situations (such as filing in a closed file or requesting certified copies) may carry small fees per Government Code §70626.

Special Situations: Class Actions, Minors, and Probate-Adjacent Matters

Some cases require court approval before dismissal, which means CIV-110 and CIV-120 alone are not enough. Under CRC 3.770, class actions cannot be dismissed without court approval. Cases involving minors typically require approval under CCP §372 and a Petition to Approve Compromise of Minor (MC-350).

The consequence of skipping these approvals is severe. A purported dismissal in a class action without CRC 3.770 approval is voidable, exposing counsel to discipline and the client to renewed litigation. A common misconception is that a minor’s personal-injury settlement can be wrapped up like an adult’s; it cannot.

For example, Linda, a parent, attempted to dismiss a minor’s slip-and-fall case using only CIV-110 and CIV-120. The court vacated the dismissal because there was no approved compromise. Linda refiled the petition, the court approved the settlement, and only then did CIV-120 properly close the case.

Recap of Key Court Rulings

The combined message of Lyons, Gogri, and Wells Properties is that voluntary dismissal is a powerful right, but it must be exercised at the right time and with the right paperwork. The plain-English consequence is that CIV-120 is not just a courtesy; it is the document that locks in the legal effect of the dismissal for cost, fee, refiling, and appeal purposes.

A real-world example: Carlos, a paralegal, calendared every CIV-120 service date as a “costs deadline trigger” in his firm’s docketing system, which protected the firm from missing fee motion windows under CCP §1033.5. A common misconception is that paperwork at the end of a case is unimportant. End-of-case paperwork is where malpractice claims are born.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is CIV-120 mandatory in every California civil case that ends by dismissal?

Yes. Under CRC 3.1390, the party who requested the dismissal must serve a notice of entry, and CIV-120 is the Judicial Council form designed for that purpose in unlimited, limited, and unlawful detainer civil cases.

Can I file CIV-120 the same day the clerk enters CIV-110?

Yes. You can file CIV-120 the same day, as long as the dismissal has actually been entered by the clerk and you have a conformed copy of CIV-110 to attach.

Does filing CIV-120 cost a filing fee?

No. Most California superior courts charge no fee to file a notice of entry, though unusual situations like certified copies may carry small fees under Government Code §70626.

Can I refile my case after a “without prejudice” dismissal noticed by CIV-120?

Yes. A “without prejudice” dismissal lets you refile, but only inside the original statute of limitations under CCP §583.130, since pendency of the first action generally does not toll it.

Can I refile after a “with prejudice” dismissal?

No. A “with prejudice” dismissal is a final judgment on the merits and triggers res judicata, blocking the same claim against the same defendant in any later California court action.

Do I need a separate proof of service when CIV-120 has one built in?

No. Most courts accept the built-in proof of service, but some local rules prefer a separate POS-030, so always check your county’s local rules before filing.

Can the plaintiff personally serve CIV-120 by mail?

No. Under CCP §1013a, the person mailing the notice must be at least 18 and not a party to the action.

Does CIV-120 trigger the deadline to file a memorandum of costs?

Yes. Under CRC 3.1700, the prevailing party must file a Memorandum of Costs (MC-010) within 15 days after service of the notice of entry of dismissal.

Can I use CIV-120 in a class action?

No. Class actions require court approval under CRC 3.770 before dismissal, so CIV-110 and CIV-120 alone are not enough to end a certified or pre-certification class case.

Can I use CIV-120 for a minor’s personal injury case?

No. Cases involving minors require court approval under CCP §372, typically through a Petition to Approve Compromise (MC-350), before any CIV-110 or CIV-120 can lawfully end the matter.

Does dismissing my case via CIV-110/CIV-120 protect me from attorney-fee exposure?

No. A defendant may still seek prevailing-party costs under CCP §1032, and §998 fee shifting may apply per Gogri v. Jack in the Box.

Can I e-file CIV-120 in California?

Yes. Most California superior courts accept and often require e-filing under CRC 2.253, and you should use your county’s approved e-filing service providers.

Related reading