Yes! You can use AI to fill out Civil Case Cover Sheet (Judicial Council of California Form CM-010)

People often skip the top caption fields (State Bar number, name, firm name, address, phone, email) or enter information that doesn’t match the complaint (e.g., different party name or outdated address). This happens because filers treat the cover sheet as “statistics only” and rush through it. Missing or inconsistent contact information can cause clerk rejections, misdirected notices, and delays in case processing. Avoid this by copying the exact attorney/party information from the first paper filed and confirming all contact fields are complete and current.

Filers sometimes omit the county, branch name, or court addresses, or they select the wrong venue when multiple courthouses exist in the same county. This usually happens when someone uses an old template or assumes the clerk will fill it in. The consequence can be a rejected filing, transfer delays, or notices being routed incorrectly. Avoid this by confirming the correct Superior Court county and branch for the venue and entering the branch name exactly as the court lists it.

A frequent error is leaving the Limited/Unlimited boxes blank or checking the wrong one because the filer confuses the amount demanded with damages “to be proven” or forgets the $35,000 threshold. This can lead to assignment to the wrong case track, incorrect filing fees, and later motions or orders to reclassify the case. Avoid it by determining whether the amount demanded exceeds $35,000 (exclusive of certain items as applicable) and ensuring the selection matches the complaint’s jurisdictional allegations and filing fee paid.

Item 1 requires checking one box that best describes the case, but people often check several boxes (e.g., both “Breach of contract” and “Fraud”) or pick a general category when a more specific one is listed. This happens because complaints often include multiple causes of action and filers try to reflect all of them. The result can be incorrect case coding, misassignment for case management, and confusion about applicable rules (especially for UD, collections, or judicial review). Avoid this by selecting the single most specific box that matches the primary cause of action and using the examples on page 3 to confirm the best fit.

Filers frequently mark “Rule 3.740 collections” without meeting the definition (sum certain not more than $35,000, credit transaction) or they fail to mark it when it does apply. This mistake happens because “collections” sounds like any debt case, and the exclusions (tort damages, punitive damages, recovery of property, attachment) are overlooked. Misclassification can place the case under the wrong procedural track and affect service/case management timelines. Avoid it by comparing the complaint to the rule’s definition and exclusions before checking the 3.740 collections box.

People often check “Yes” for complex because the case feels complicated, or they check “No” even when the case is provisionally complex (e.g., construction defect, mass tort), and they frequently forget to mark the specific factors (a–f). This happens because “complex” has a specific meaning under rule 3.400 and the form requires both the designation and the management factors. The consequence can be improper assignment, disputes at first appearance, and delays if the court must re-evaluate complexity. Avoid it by confirming whether the case is complex under rule 3.400 (or provisionally complex under the listed categories) and, if “Yes,” checking the applicable factors that justify exceptional judicial management.

A common error is leaving Item 4 blank, writing “see complaint,” or entering an incorrect number that doesn’t match the pleaded causes of action. This happens when filers count legal theories incorrectly (e.g., remedies or allegations) or forget amended/alternative counts. Inaccurate counts can affect statistical reporting and sometimes case management expectations, and it can prompt clerk questions or corrections. Avoid it by counting the distinct causes of action listed in the complaint’s headings (including statutory claims) and entering the total number.

Filers often check only “monetary” even when the complaint seeks injunctive/declaratory relief, or they check “punitive” when punitive damages are not actually pleaded (or are not legally available for the claim). This happens because people equate “punitive” with “large damages” or overlook prayer-for-relief details. Incorrect remedy selections can mislead case coding and create inconsistencies with the complaint that may require correction. Avoid it by matching Item 3 strictly to the remedies expressly requested in the complaint and prayer (monetary, nonmonetary, and punitive only if pleaded).

People sometimes mark “Yes” because there are multiple plaintiffs or because the dispute affects many people, even though no class allegations are pleaded; others mark “No” despite including class allegations. This happens due to confusion between “multiple parties” and a certified/putative class action. Mislabeling can affect case handling, complexity assessment, and early case management requirements. Avoid it by checking “Yes” only if the complaint includes class action allegations (a putative class) and “No” otherwise.

Filers often leave Item 6 unaddressed and fail to file/serve a Notice of Related Case even when there are known related matters (same parties, same transaction, or overlapping issues). This happens because the cover sheet doesn’t ask for details in Item 6 and people assume it’s optional. The consequence can be missed opportunities for coordination, inconsistent rulings, reassignment delays, or court orders requiring a late related-case notice. Avoid it by actively checking for related cases (including prior or pending matters) and promptly filing and serving CM-015 when any are known.

A frequent last-step mistake is submitting the form without a signature, without typing/printing the name, or without dating it. This happens especially with e-filing when the filer assumes the electronic submission is the signature. An unsigned or incomplete verification block can lead to rejection by the clerk or a request to cure, delaying issuance of summons and case setup. Avoid it by completing the Date, Type/Print Name, and Signature fields exactly as required before filing (and ensuring e-signature format complies with the court’s e-filing rules).