The California pro hac vice application is the formal request that lets an out-of-state attorney appear in a single California state court case by filing Judicial Council Form APP-310 under California Rules of Court, Rule 9.40. The applicant pays a $50 fee to the State Bar of California, serves the Office of General Counsel, and partners with an active California “local counsel of record” who shares responsibility for the case.
Getting any field wrong on Form APP-310 can trigger a denial, and practicing in California without admission is unauthorized practice of law under Business & Professions Code § 6125, which carries criminal exposure. The State Bar processes thousands of these applications each year, and rejection rates spike on three issues: missing the $50 fee, omitting the two-year history of prior California appearances, and failing to serve the State Bar at its San Francisco address.
In this guide you will learn:
- 📋 Every box on Form APP-310 explained in plain English with sample entries
- 💵 How to pay the $50 State Bar fee and the local court filing fee without rejection
- 🧑⚖️ How to pick and coordinate with California local counsel under Rule 9.40
- 📨 How to serve the State Bar’s Office of General Counsel correctly
- 🛑 The most common mistakes that get pro hac vice applications denied
What the Pro Hac Vice Application Is and Who Must File It
The California pro hac vice application is a verified motion that asks a California state trial or appellate court to let an out-of-state lawyer appear in one specific case. The legal authority is California Rules of Court, Rule 9.40, and the Judicial Council publishes two optional but widely accepted forms: APP-310 (Application) and APP-311 (Notice of Hearing), both bearing a January 1, 2024 revision date.
You must file this application if you are a member in good standing of another United States jurisdiction, you are not a California resident, you are not regularly employed in California, and you are not regularly engaged in business or professional activities in California. Rule 9.40(a) bars repeat filers: an attorney who has appeared pro hac vice more than a handful of times in the prior two years can be denied as “regularly engaged” in California practice.
The rule does not apply to military counsel, federal court appearances (those follow each district’s local rules, like Central District Local Rule 83-2.1.3), or registered in-house counsel under Rule 9.46. It is also distinct from the State Bar’s Multijurisdictional Practice (MJP) registration programs at calbar.ca.gov/MJP, which cover legal services and registered foreign legal consultants.
Common filers include a New York commercial litigator joining a Los Angeles Superior Court business dispute, a Texas patent attorney appearing in a state-court trade secret case, a Florida family-law specialist representing a spouse in an Orange County divorce, an Illinois class-action lawyer appearing in a San Francisco consumer suit, and an out-of-state appellate specialist appearing on a writ in the Court of Appeal. Each must clear the same Rule 9.40 hurdles, regardless of how prominent the underlying case is.
Before You Start: Documents and Information You Need
Open a single folder before you touch the form. Pro hac vice applications fail more often from missing attachments than from typos in the boxes themselves. Gather these items first so you can fill in every field with confidence and avoid a clerk’s rejection or a State Bar bounce-back.
- Your bar number(s) and admission date(s) in every U.S. jurisdiction where you are licensed. The form requires a complete list, and omissions are treated as material misrepresentations.
- A current Certificate of Good Standing from your home jurisdiction’s highest court, dated within the last 30–60 days where the local court requires it.
- California local counsel’s full name, State Bar number, firm, address, phone, and email. Without an active California “counsel of record,” the application fails on its face under Rule 9.40(d).
- The exact case caption and case number from the California court where you will appear, copied verbatim from the most recent filing.
- A list of every California pro hac vice application you filed in the past two years, with court name, case caption, and case number for each.
- A $50 check, money order, or online payment authorization payable to The State Bar of California, plus the local court’s motion filing fee (varies by county).
- The party you represent and that party’s role (plaintiff, defendant, petitioner, respondent, cross-complainant).
- Your residence address and your principal office address, because Rule 9.40(a) turns on California residence and California business activity.
- The name and bar number of every other attorney appearing for the same party in the case, since the court must see who else is on the team.
- Proof of service template ready to serve the State Bar’s Office of General Counsel at 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, plus all parties.
If any one of these is missing, stop and gather it. A pro hac vice motion that hits the clerk’s desk without the State Bar fee or without local counsel’s signature is dead on arrival, and refiling can cost weeks on a tight trial calendar.
Where to Get the Form and How to Access It
The official application is Judicial Council form APP-310, and the companion notice is APP-311. Both are free PDFs hosted on the California Courts forms portal. Always download a fresh copy for every new filing because the Judicial Council updates these forms periodically, and a stale revision date can draw a clerk’s rejection.
Use the fillable version when possible. The fillable PDF performs basic math on dates, locks the layout, and prevents the formatting drift that happens when filers retype the form in Word. Open the file in Adobe Acrobat Reader rather than a browser preview, because some browsers strip form data on save and you will lose your work.
You can also pick up paper copies at most superior court self-help centers, including the LASC Self-Help Resource Centers, the San Francisco ACCESS Center, and the Orange County Self-Help Center. Some courts also publish their own local pro hac vice cover sheet, so check the local rules tab on the court’s website before assuming APP-310 is the only document you need.
If you are appearing in the Court of Appeal or the California Supreme Court, the same Rule 9.40 framework applies, and the appellate clerk’s office accepts APP-310 with appellate-style captions. The Supreme Court of California and each Court of Appeal district have their own e-filing portal (TrueFiling), which you must register for before submission.
Step-by-Step: How to Fill Out APP-310 Line by Line
Form APP-310 is two pages. The top half identifies the case and the parties, the middle is a verified declaration of the applicant’s eligibility, and the bottom carries signatures. Every box matters, and the order on the form is the order you should complete it. Treat each H3 below as a checklist for one field.
Caption Box: Court Name and Branch
The top-left box asks for the superior court county and the branch or district where the case is pending. Write the official court name exactly as it appears on the most recent filed document, including the branch name when the county has more than one courthouse.
For example, Maria Lopez, a New York attorney joining a Los Angeles case, writes “SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES — STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE” on the top line. Use all capital letters because that matches Judicial Council typography and how the clerk indexes the case.
A common nuance trips up filers in counts with multiple branches. If the matter was filed in the LASC unlimited civil hub at Mosk but later transferred to a complex litigation department at Spring Street, list the current branch, not the original filing branch.
The most common mistake on this field is using the federal court name out of habit, such as writing “U.S. District Court, Central District of California.” That single error can route the application to the wrong clerk and delay processing by weeks. The misconception filers carry is that the caption only needs to match “close enough”; in reality, California clerks reject motions whose captions do not match the case management system character-for-character.
Caption Box: Case Name and Case Number
The right-hand caption asks for the case name (e.g., Smith v. Acme Corp.) and the case number issued by the clerk at filing. Copy both from a recent court-stamped pleading rather than from an email, because email signatures often abbreviate the caption.
Carlos Nguyen, a Texas trade-secret attorney, enters “ACME ROBOTICS, INC. v. ZENITH INDUSTRIES, LLC” and “24STCV01234” in the case-number box. Los Angeles uses the prefix “STCV” for unlimited civil; San Francisco uses “CGC”; Orange County uses “30-2024-“.
The nuance: if the case has been consolidated, list the lead case number on APP-310 and add the consolidated numbers in an attachment. Do not stack multiple case numbers in the box, because the clerk’s optical character system reads only the first number.
The common mistake is transposing two digits in the case number, which sends the filing to a non-existent file and triggers a clerk reject notice. The misconception is that the case number alone is enough; the case name must also match, because the clerk indexes both fields.
Item 1: Applicant’s Name, Address, and Contact Information
Item 1 asks for the applicant attorney’s full legal name, residence address, telephone number, and email. Use the name on your home-state bar card, not a nickname or a firm-marketing version.
Janet Whitmore, an Illinois class-action lawyer, writes “JANET ELIZABETH WHITMORE,” her home address in Chicago, her direct dial, and her firm email in Item 1. Residence address means where you actually live, not where your firm is located, because Rule 9.40(a) turns on California residence.
The nuance involves attorneys who have moved recently. If your home-state bar still lists an old address, update it before applying, because California cross-references your residence claim against your home-state record. P.O. boxes are accepted only if you also list a physical address.
The common mistake is listing the firm’s California satellite office as the “residence” address. That single move makes the applicant look like a California resident under Rule 9.40 and is grounds for outright denial. The misconception is that “address” means whatever address you want noticed in the case; it does not — Item 1 is a residency disclosure, not a service address.
Item 2: Applicant’s Office Address and Firm Information
Item 2 captures the applicant’s principal office address, firm name, and office telephone number. This is the address where you regularly practice law, which the court uses to assess whether you are “regularly engaged in business or professional activities” in California.
David Park, a Florida appellate specialist, lists his Miami office, “Park & Reyes Appellate Group, LLP,” and the main firm number. If you work from multiple offices, list the office where you spend the majority of your professional time.
The nuance: remote-work attorneys must list their actual workspace, not a virtual mailbox. Courts have started cross-checking listed offices against secretary-of-state filings, and a phantom address can be flagged as a misrepresentation under Business & Professions Code § 6068.
The common mistake is listing a California co-counsel’s office as the applicant’s office, which contradicts the Rule 9.40 eligibility statement. The misconception is that the firm’s California office of record helps the application; it actively hurts it because it suggests in-state practice.
Item 3: Bar Admissions in All Jurisdictions
Item 3 requires the applicant to list every U.S. court, every state, and every territory where the applicant is licensed, with admission dates and current bar numbers. This is a sworn list, and incompleteness is treated as a material misstatement.
Aisha Brown, a New York–DC dual-admitted attorney, writes: “New York (admitted 6/15/2009, bar no. 4567890); District of Columbia (admitted 12/8/2010, bar no. 998877); U.S. District Court, S.D.N.Y. (admitted 7/10/2010); U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (admitted 3/4/2014).” List state courts first, then federal courts, in chronological order.
The nuance: lapsed or inactive admissions still must be disclosed, with their current status noted. If you let your Massachusetts license go inactive, write “Massachusetts (admitted 9/1/2005, currently inactive).”
The common mistake is leaving off federal court admissions because the filer assumes only state bars matter. Rule 9.40(d)(2) demands “the courts to which applicant has been admitted to practice and the dates of admission,” and federal courts are explicitly included. The misconception is that the applicant only needs to list jurisdictions where they currently practice, when in fact every admission, active or inactive, must appear.
Item 4: Good Standing Statement
Item 4 is the good-standing declaration: the applicant attests under oath that they are a member in good standing of the courts listed in Item 3. Some courts require an attached Certificate of Good Standing from the home state’s highest court, dated within 30 to 60 days.
Maria Lopez attaches a New York Appellate Division, First Department certificate dated 12 days before filing, and writes “See attached Certificate of Good Standing, Exhibit A” in the Item 4 narrative space. Always attach the highest-court certificate, not a county or trial-court letter.
The nuance: if you have any pending discipline, even an informal investigation, you must disclose it. Rule 9.40(d)(3) requires applicants to state whether they are subject to “any pending disciplinary proceeding.”
The common mistake is attaching a stale certificate. Several California superior courts (including LASC Department 1 and SFSC Department 302) require certificates issued within the past 30 days; a 90-day-old certificate gets the application calendared off. The misconception is that the State Bar of California will pull your record from a national database; it will not, and the burden of proof is entirely on the applicant.
Item 5: Pending Disciplinary Proceedings
Item 5 asks whether the applicant is subject to any pending disciplinary proceedings in any jurisdiction. Check the box truthfully, and if “yes,” attach a separate sheet with the case name, jurisdiction, status, and a short factual statement.
Carlos Nguyen, who has no pending matters, simply checks “No”. An applicant with a pending grievance in Illinois would write “Yes — Illinois ARDC Inquiry No. 24-IN-1234, complaint pending review since March 2024, no formal charges filed.”
The nuance: even informal “inquiries” count if the home-state regulator has assigned a docket number. Hiding a pending inquiry to avoid embarrassment is far worse than disclosing it, because the State Bar of California cross-checks the ABA National Lawyer Regulatory Data Bank.
The common mistake is reading “disciplinary proceeding” as “disbarment” only and answering “No” when an open complaint exists. That misanswer is itself a fresh ethics violation. The misconception is that closed or dismissed matters need to be reported; only pending proceedings go in Item 5, while closed matters typically belong in a separate disclosure if the local court asks.
Item 6: Prior California Pro Hac Vice Appearances
Item 6 asks the applicant to list every California state court case in which they have applied to appear pro hac vice in the preceding two years. List the court, case caption, case number, and date of each application.
Janet Whitmore lists three prior matters: “(1) San Francisco Superior Court, Doe v. Tech Co., CGC-23-589012, application filed 2/3/2023; (2) Alameda Superior Court, Roe v. Bank, RG23-101010, application filed 8/14/2023; (3) Los Angeles Superior Court, Smith v. Lender, 23STCV45678, application filed 1/9/2024.” If there are none, write “None.”
The nuance: courts use this list to enforce Rule 9.40(b), which lets a judge deny pro hac vice when the applicant’s prior California appearances suggest “regular” California practice. There is no hard cap, but more than a few appearances per year invites scrutiny.
The common mistake is omitting cases that settled or were dismissed quickly. The rule cares about the application, not the outcome, so even a withdrawn motion counts. The misconception is that federal pro hac vice appearances must be listed too; Item 6 is limited to California state court applications.
Item 7: Local Counsel of Record
Item 7 names the active California attorney of record who will associate with the applicant. List the lawyer’s full name, State Bar of California number, firm, office address, telephone number, and email.
David Park names “Sandra Kim, SBN 234567, Kim & Associates, 555 California Street, Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 94104, (415) 555-0199, skim@kimlaw.com.” Verify the bar number on the State Bar’s licensee search the day you file, because suspended counsel will torpedo the motion.
The nuance: Rule 9.40(d)(6) requires that local counsel be a member of the State Bar and an attorney of record in the case. A friend who is admitted but not appearing in this case does not count.
The common mistake is naming a paralegal or out-of-state co-counsel who happens to live in California; the rule requires an active California-licensed lawyer who has filed a notice of appearance in the underlying case. The misconception is that local counsel is a rubber stamp; in reality, local counsel signs APP-310, accepts service, and shares ethical responsibility for the matter.
Item 8: Party Represented and Role
Item 8 identifies the party the applicant represents and that party’s role in the litigation. Write the party’s name exactly as it appears in the caption, then check or write the role (plaintiff, defendant, petitioner, respondent, cross-complainant, intervenor).
Aisha Brown writes “Defendant, Acme Robotics, Inc.” Match the role to the operative pleading, not to the original complaint, because cross-complaints and amended pleadings can flip a party’s role.
The nuance: in multi-party cases, list every party the applicant represents, even affiliated entities. If you represent both a parent corporation and a subsidiary, list both with their respective roles.
The common mistake is writing “all defendants” instead of naming each entity. Clerks and judges need to see the exact alignment, because pro hac vice authority is granted as to specified parties, not the whole defense side. The misconception is that representation can be expanded later by oral motion; it cannot — adding a new client requires a new APP-310.
Verification and Signature Block
Below the substantive items, APP-310 contains a verification under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, signed and dated by the applicant. Local counsel signs immediately below in the “Counsel of Record” signature block.
Maria Lopez prints “MARIA J. LOPEZ” above her signature, dates it “January 15, 2026,” and lists “New York” as the place of signing. The verification language tracks Code of Civil Procedure § 2015.5, which is why the place of signing matters.
The nuance: if the applicant signs outside California, the verification must include “I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California.” A signature inside California does not need the “under the laws of the State of California” clause, but it never hurts to include it.
The common mistake is letting local counsel sign in the applicant’s signature block as a courtesy. The verification is personal to the applicant, and a substitute signature voids it. The misconception is that an electronic signature is not allowed; California Code of Civil Procedure § 17(b)(2) and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.257 authorize “/s/” signatures on electronically filed documents.
Three Filled-Out Examples Using Real Scenarios
The three scenarios below show how three different applicants complete the most important fields. Each row mirrors the line on Form APP-310 to make it easier to model your own answers. The names and case numbers are illustrative only.
Scenario 1 — Maria Lopez, New York commercial litigator appearing in LASC
| Form Section | What Maria Enters |
|---|---|
| Court Name | SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES — STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE |
| Case Name and Number | Acme Robotics, Inc. v. Zenith Industries, LLC, 24STCV01234 |
| Item 1 — Applicant Address | Maria J. Lopez, 220 East 72nd St., Apt. 14B, New York, NY 10021 |
| Item 2 — Office | Lopez & Greene LLP, 1271 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020 |
| Item 3 — Admissions | NY (2009), SDNY (2010), 2d Cir. (2014) |
| Item 5 — Discipline | No |
| Item 6 — Prior CA PHV | None |
| Item 7 — Local Counsel | Sandra Kim, SBN 234567, Kim & Associates, San Francisco |
| Item 8 — Party | Defendant, Acme Robotics, Inc. |
| Fee | $50 to State Bar + LASC motion fee |
Scenario 2 — Carlos Nguyen, Texas trade-secret attorney in San Francisco Superior Court
| Form Section | What Carlos Enters |
|---|---|
| Court Name | SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO — CIVIC CENTER COURTHOUSE |
| Case Name and Number | Bayline Semiconductor v. Northstar Labs, CGC-25-612345 |
| Item 1 — Applicant Address | Carlos R. Nguyen, 4801 Travis St., Houston, TX 77002 |
| Item 2 — Office | Nguyen IP Law PLLC, 700 Louisiana St., Suite 4500, Houston, TX |
| Item 3 — Admissions | TX (2012), SDTX (2013), Fed. Cir. (2016), USPTO Reg. No. 65432 |
| Item 5 — Discipline | No |
| Item 6 — Prior CA PHV | One: SCSC, Helio v. Quark, 23CV987654, filed 7/2024 |
| Item 7 — Local Counsel | Daniel Ortega, SBN 198765, Ortega Tech Litigation, San Jose |
| Item 8 — Party | Plaintiff, Bayline Semiconductor, Inc. |
| Fee | $50 State Bar + $60 SFSC motion fee |
Scenario 3 — Janet Whitmore, Illinois class-action lawyer appearing in Alameda Superior Court
| Form Section | What Janet Enters |
|---|---|
| Court Name | SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA — RENE C. DAVIDSON COURTHOUSE |
| Case Name and Number | Garcia v. National Lender Services, 25CV098765 |
| Item 1 — Applicant Address | Janet E. Whitmore, 2150 N. Lincoln Park West, Chicago, IL 60614 |
| Item 2 — Office | Whitmore Class Action Group, 161 N. Clark St., Chicago, IL 60601 |
| Item 3 — Admissions | IL (2007), ND Ill. (2008), 7th Cir. (2011) |
| Item 5 — Discipline | No |
| Item 6 — Prior CA PHV | Three (SF, Alameda, LA) within last 24 months |
| Item 7 — Local Counsel | Priya Shah, SBN 312654, Shah Consumer Law, Oakland |
| Item 8 — Party | Plaintiff, Lead Class Representative Lucia Garcia |
| Fee | $50 State Bar + $60 Alameda motion fee |
How to File the Completed Form
California superior courts now accept pro hac vice motions through three channels: electronic filing, mail, and in-person at the clerk’s window. Each channel has its own fee, processing time, and proof-of-filing protocol, and most counties mandate e-filing for represented parties under local rule.
For e-filing in Los Angeles County, use File & ServeXpress or the LASC eFile portal at efile.lacourt.org. San Francisco uses File & ServeXpress too, while Orange County uses Odyssey eFileCA. Expect the motion fee (commonly $20–$60) plus a small e-filing service fee charged to a credit card or escrow account. Processing is usually 1–3 business days, and your proof-of-filing is the electronic confirmation with the file-stamped copy.
For mail filing, send the original APP-310, the proposed order, the $50 State Bar check, the local court motion fee check, and a self-addressed stamped envelope to the clerk’s office. The State Bar fee mails separately to the State Bar of California, Office of General Counsel, 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Allow 7–14 business days for processing, and keep certified mail receipts as proof.
For in-person filing, take three sets (original plus two copies) to the clerk’s window. The clerk file-stamps two copies and returns one to you as your proof-of-filing. Court motion fees are paid at the window via cash, check, or card.
Pay the $50 State Bar fee under Rule 9.40(e) by check or via the State Bar’s pro hac vice payment portal. The State Bar’s receipt is your proof of payment, and you must file that proof with the court or attach it to the motion. Keep both proofs in your case file for at least the life of the matter plus one year.
What Happens After You File
After the clerk accepts the motion, the court sets a hearing date (or in many counties grants the motion on the papers without a hearing). Use Form APP-311 to give notice of any hearing date to all parties, the State Bar, and any judge whose chambers requires a courtesy copy.
If the motion is granted, you receive a signed order admitting you pro hac vice in that case. The order is your authority to appear, sign pleadings, take depositions, and try the matter. Keep a clean copy on hand at every appearance because some judicial officers will ask to see it before allowing you to argue.
If the motion is denied, the court usually denies without prejudice and identifies the defect (often the missing State Bar fee, missing certificate, or excessive prior appearances). You can refile after curing the defect. A denial does not count as discipline, but a pattern of denials can.
After admission, you remain bound by the California Rules of Professional Conduct for the duration of the case, and you can be sanctioned by the trial judge or referred for State Bar discipline. Your local counsel remains co-responsible until a substitution is filed and approved.
Mistakes to Avoid When Filling Out the Form
Every error below has cost real applicants real time. Read this list before you click “submit” on the e-filing portal.
- Forgetting the $50 State Bar fee, which is the single most common reason pro hac vice motions get denied without prejudice.
- Listing the firm’s California satellite office as the applicant’s residence or principal office, contradicting Rule 9.40(a) eligibility.
- Omitting federal court admissions in Item 3, which is treated as an incomplete sworn statement.
- Filing a stale Certificate of Good Standing older than the local court’s 30–60 day window.
- Failing to disclose a pending home-state inquiry in Item 5, which can trigger a separate California ethics complaint.
- Leaving prior California pro hac vice cases off Item 6, which the court can verify against statewide case management data.
- Naming a California attorney who has not appeared in the case as local counsel.
- Using a federal court caption instead of the superior court caption, sending the filing to the wrong clerk.
- Omitting the proof of service on the State Bar’s Office of General Counsel at 180 Howard Street.
- Letting local counsel sign the applicant’s verification block as a courtesy, voiding the sworn statement.
- Mismatching the case number by even one digit, which causes automatic clerk rejection.
- Submitting without a proposed order, which most California judges require lodged with the motion.
Do’s and Don’ts
These quick rules keep your application clean and your timeline tight, and each one ties directly to a specific Rule 9.40 requirement or a clerk’s processing standard.
Do’s
- Do download a fresh APP-310 for each new filing, because the Judicial Council updates revision dates without warning.
- Do verify local counsel’s bar status on the State Bar licensee search the morning you file, because suspended counsel kills the motion.
- Do list every admission, including inactive ones, because Rule 9.40(d)(2) requires a complete record.
- Do pay the State Bar fee separately from any court fees, because the two payees are different and combined checks are returned.
- Do attach a recent Certificate of Good Standing even when the local rule does not strictly require one, because many judges expect it.
- Do calendar the proof-of-service deadline to the State Bar so it is not forgotten in the post-filing rush.
Don’ts
- Don’t list a virtual office or a California co-counsel address as your principal office, because it suggests California practice.
- Don’t assume “good standing” is automatic in jurisdictions where you have not paid recent dues; check first.
- Don’t omit pending inquiries even if you believe they are meritless, because nondisclosure is the heavier offense.
- Don’t combine multiple parties under “all defendants” in Item 8, because pro hac vice authority is party-specific.
- Don’t file without local counsel’s signature, because Rule 9.40(d)(6) makes the application incomplete.
- Don’t ignore local rules; LASC, SFSC, and OCSC each have small but binding cover-sheet or chambers-copy requirements.
Pros and Cons of Filing on Your Own vs. With Local Counsel’s Help
Many out-of-state attorneys draft APP-310 themselves and ask local counsel only to sign. Others ask local counsel to prepare the entire packet. Both approaches are valid, and the right call depends on your familiarity with California practice, the complexity of the case, and your fee budget.
Pros of filing it yourself
- Lower cost, because you do not pay local counsel for drafting time.
- Faster turnaround, since you control the schedule.
- Better familiarity with your own practice history, admissions, and disciplinary record.
- Direct ownership of accuracy in the verification.
- More control over the certificate-of-good-standing timing.
Cons of filing it yourself
- Higher risk of formatting and local-rule errors, especially with cover sheets.
- No backstop if you misread Rule 9.40’s residency triggers.
- Limited insight into the assigned judge’s local preferences for proposed orders.
- More chances to miss county-specific filing fees and chambers-copy rules.
- Longer learning curve for the e-filing portal of each county.
FAQs
Do I need California local counsel to file APP-310?
Yes. Rule 9.40(d)(6) requires an active California-licensed attorney who is a counsel of record in the case to sign and accept service. Without that signature, the application is incomplete.
Is the $50 State Bar fee separate from the court filing fee?
Yes. The $50 fee under Rule 9.40(e) goes to the State Bar of California, while the court motion fee (commonly $20–$60) goes to the superior court clerk. Combined checks get returned.
Can I appear pro hac vice if I live in California?
No. Rule 9.40(a) bars California residents from pro hac vice admission. California residents must seek bar admission, MJP registration, or another authorized status.
How many times can I appear pro hac vice in California in one year?
No specific cap exists, but Rule 9.40(b) lets the court deny applications when prior appearances suggest “regular” California practice. More than three or four per year often draws scrutiny.
Do I list federal court admissions in Item 3?
Yes. Item 3 covers all U.S. courts, state and federal, where you are admitted. Omitting federal admissions is treated as an incomplete sworn statement.
Should I attach a Certificate of Good Standing?
Yes. Most California superior courts expect a recent (30–60 day) Certificate of Good Standing from your home state’s highest court, even though Rule 9.40 does not strictly mandate one.
Do I write my maiden name or current legal name in Item 1?
Yes — use your current legal name as it appears on your home-state bar card, and list any prior name in a parenthetical only if your good-standing certificate uses that prior name.
What goes in Item 6 if I have never appeared in California before?
No prior cases means you simply write “None.” Leaving Item 6 blank is treated as a missing answer, while writing “None” is a complete answer.
Can I e-sign APP-310?
Yes. California Rules of Court, Rule 2.257 permits “/s/” signatures on electronically filed documents, and the verification language under Code of Civil Procedure § 2015.5 still applies.
Do I need to serve the State Bar?
Yes. Rule 9.40(c)(1) requires service of the application on the State Bar at its San Francisco office, 180 Howard Street, in addition to all parties in the case.
Is APP-310 used in federal court?
No. Federal pro hac vice practice in California is governed by each district’s local rules, not Rule 9.40 or APP-310. Use the Central, Northern, Eastern, or Southern District’s own form.
Does the application expire?
No. Once granted, the order admits you for the duration of the specific case, but it does not extend to other cases. A new case requires a fresh APP-310.
What happens if the motion is denied?
No discipline attaches automatically, and most denials are “without prejudice,” letting you refile after curing the defect (often the missing State Bar fee, missing certificate, or excess prior appearances).
Do I need to update Item 6 if a new pro hac vice case starts after I file?
No. Item 6 is a snapshot at the time of application, but you have a continuing duty under Business & Professions Code § 6068(d) to correct any material misstatement that becomes inaccurate.
Related reading
- How to Fill Out Texas Bar Pro Hac Vice Application (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the Washington WSBA Pro Hac Vice Application + FAQs
- How to Fill Out Georgia Pro Hac Vice Application (GA) (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the Federal Court Bar Admission Application + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the In-House Counsel Registration (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the Multistate Pro Hac Vice Verified Statement + FAQs
- How to Fill Out the State Bar of Arizona Annual Registration + FAQs