Reference  ·  October 22, 2026

California Lis Pendens: Recording One and Expunging It

The short answer

A lis pendens, which California's statute calls a notice of pendency of action, is a recorded document telling the world that a lawsuit affects title to, or possession of, a particular property. It does not legally prohibit a sale or a loan. It does something more effective: anyone who buys or lends after it is recorded takes subject to the outcome of the lawsuit. The California Supreme Court has said "the practical effect of a recorded lis pendens is to render a defendant's property unmarketable." (Kirkeby v. Superior Court (2004) 33 Cal.4th 642, quoting La Paglia v. Superior Court (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 1322.)

Because it is that powerful, the Code of Civil Procedure, sections 405 through 405.61, controls who may record one, what must be done first, and how an owner gets it removed. The key points:

• Only a party asserting a real property claim may record one, and an attorney of record must sign it, or, if the party is self-represented, a judge must approve it.
• The owner may move to expunge it at any time, and the claimant carries the burden of proving a real property claim and its probable validity.
• The winner of that motion is ordinarily awarded attorney fees.
• The ruling cannot be appealed. Review is by writ petition filed and served within 20 days after service of written notice of the order.

When can someone record a lis pendens in California?

Only on a "real property claim"

Section 405.20 allows "a party to an action who asserts a real property claim" to record a notice in each county where any part of the property lies. Section 405.4 defines the term: "the cause or causes of action in a pleading which would, if meritorious, affect (a) title to, or the right to possession of, specific real property or (b) the use of an easement identified in the pleading," other than certain public utility easements.

Claims that typically qualify:

• Quiet title. The statute requires the plaintiff to record a lis pendens immediately upon commencing the action (Code Civ. Proc., § 761.010, subd. (b)).
• Partition. Also mandatory, under Code of Civil Procedure section 872.250; if the plaintiff does not record one, the court must order it recorded and stay the case until it is.
• Mechanics lien foreclosure. Civil Code section 8461 requires the claimant to record a notice within 20 days after filing the action. See our mechanics lien deadlines article.
• Easement disputes, including against the property the easement benefits as well as the land it crosses (Park 100 Investment Group II, LLC v. Ryan (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 795).
• Specific performance of a purchase contract, which seeks to transfer title. See the seller backed out, can I force the sale?
• Fraudulent transfer claims seeking to set aside a conveyance of real property. Kirkeby held such a claim qualifies even though the plaintiff's ultimate goal is collecting money.

What does not qualify

A lawsuit for money does not become a real property claim because the defendant owns real estate. The question is what the claim, as pleaded, would do if it succeeded: affect title to or possession of specific property, or only produce a money judgment. Older cases, such as Urez Corp. v. Superior Court (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 1141, decided under the predecessor statute, looked at whether equitable claims were really a means of collecting money. Kirkeby rejected that purpose-based approach for section 405.31: the court examines the claim as pleaded, not the plaintiff's ultimate goal.

Constructive trust claims are less settled. Kirkeby expressly left open whether a constructive trust or equitable lien claim can support a lis pendens. BGJ Associates, LLC v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 952 upheld expungement where constructive trust counts were added to an essentially monetary case, while Shoker v. Superior Court (2022) 81 Cal.App.5th 271 held that a constructive trust claim seeking reconveyance of specific properties was a real property claim and declined to follow BGJ's approach. The answer depends on what the pleading actually seeks.

The recording steps are not optional

• Signature. Under section 405.21, outside eminent domain cases, the notice may not be recorded unless an attorney of record signed it, or a self-represented party signed it and a judge approved it.
• Mailing before recording. Section 405.22 requires the claimant, before recording, to mail a copy "by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to all known addresses of the parties to whom the real property claim is adverse and to all owners of record of the real property affected by the real property claim as shown by the latest county assessment roll." A copy must be filed with the court immediately after recording.
• Proof of service recorded with it. Section 405.23 makes the notice "void and invalid as to any adverse party or owner of record" unless those mailing requirements are met for that party or owner and a proof of service in the form required by section 1013a "has been recorded with the notice."

An owner who finds a notice on title should check those three things first. A defect can make the notice void as to that owner and strengthen a motion to expunge, but the recorded document stays on title until a court order or withdrawal is recorded.

What does a lis pendens do to a sale or refinance?

Section 405.24 makes the recorded notice constructive notice to any later "purchaser, encumbrancer, or other transferee" of the property, and provides that the claimant's rights, "as ultimately determined in the pending noticed action, shall relate back to the date of the recording of the notice."

So a buyer or lender who proceeds is betting on the lawsuit. Courts have recognized what that means in practice: in BGJ Associates the court said a lis pendens "clouds the title and effectively prevents the property's transfer." An owner in the middle of a sale, a 1031 exchange or a refinance feels that immediately.

Constructive notice extends only to the action's "pendency against parties not fictitiously named," so claims against Doe defendants are not noticed.

How do I get a lis pendens expunged?

Who may move, and when

Section 405.30 allows "any party, or any nonparty with an interest in the real property affected thereby" to move to expunge "at any time after notice of pendency of action has been recorded." A nonparty, such as a buyer in escrow or a lender, must obtain leave to intervene at or before the time the motion is brought.

The statute then reverses the usual rule: "The claimant shall have the burden of proof under Sections 405.31 and 405.32." The person who recorded the notice must justify it.

Ground one: no real property claim (section 405.31)

The court "shall order the notice expunged if the court finds that the pleading on which the notice is based does not contain a real property claim." This is a test of the complaint, not the evidence. Kirkeby described it as "a demurrer-like analysis" that "involves only a review of the adequacy of the pleading and normally should not involve evidence from either side."

Ground two: no probable validity (section 405.32)

Even with a proper real property claim, the court "shall order that the notice be expunged if the court finds that the claimant has not established by a preponderance of the evidence the probable validity of the real property claim." Section 405.3 defines probable validity: "it is more likely than not that the claimant will obtain a judgment against the defendant on the claim."

This is an evidentiary hearing. Declarations and documents come in, and the court may allow oral testimony and order discovery tied to the motion. A claimant who recorded the notice on a thin complaint has to show, now, that the claim is more likely than not to succeed.

Ground three: an undertaking instead (section 405.33)

If the claim does have probable validity, the court still must expunge the notice if "adequate relief can be secured to the claimant by the giving of an undertaking," conditioned on the owner posting an undertaking in an amount that will indemnify the claimant for damages caused by the expungement if the claimant ultimately wins. If the owner does not post it by the return date the court sets, the motion is denied.

The claimant's natural answer is that money cannot replace the property. Section 405.33 limits that argument: the Civil Code section 3387 presumption that real property is unique does not apply for this purpose, "except in the case of real property improved with a single-family dwelling which the claimant intends to occupy." A buyer suing to acquire a commercial building or a rental property has to show more than the general rule that land is unique.

Section 405.34 works in the other direction: the court may require the claimant to post an undertaking as a condition of keeping the notice on record.

Fees to the winner

Section 405.38: "The court shall direct that the party prevailing on any motion under this chapter be awarded the reasonable attorney's fees and costs of making or opposing the motion unless the court finds that the other party acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of attorney's fees and costs unjust."

Two qualifiers. The fees go to whoever prevails on the motion, owner or claimant. And they cover the motion, not the whole lawsuit.

After the ruling: the writ, the timing and the recording

No appeal, only a writ, on a short deadline

Section 405.39: "No order or other action of the court under this chapter shall be appealable." An aggrieved party may petition the proper reviewing court, usually the Court of Appeal, for a writ of mandate, which "shall be filed and served within 20 days of service of written notice of the order by the court or any party." The trial court may, within the initial 20 days, extend that period once, by no more than 10 days.

The clock runs from service of written notice of the order, not from the hearing.

The Fourth District applied this rule in Grimberg v. Pour (July 17, 2026, D085888), a published decision. A probate court order authorizing a lis pendens was held not appealable; section 405.39 controls, and a party cannot "manufacture appellate jurisdiction" by skipping a motion to expunge. The court declined to treat the notice of appeal as a writ petition because it had been filed well outside the 20-day period.

The order is not effective right away

Section 405.35 provides that an expungement order is not effective, and may not be recorded, until the time to petition for a writ has expired, and if a petition is timely filed, until that proceeding is finally decided. An owner planning a closing should build in at least 20 days after service of written notice of the order, more if the trial court extends the period or service was by mail, and longer if a petition is filed.

Recording the order clears the way

Once the order can be recorded, a certified copy goes to the county recorder. Under section 405.60, after recording, neither the notice nor information derived from it is actual or constructive notice of the claims or creates a duty of inquiry, until a certified copy of a judgment in the action is recorded. Section 405.61 goes further for later purchasers and encumbrancers for value, who are not deemed to have actual knowledge of the action "irrespective of whether that person possessed actual knowledge," and it states the Legislature's intent to provide "the absolute and complete free transferability of real property after the expungement or withdrawal of a notice of pendency of action." That protection does not extend to nonfictitious parties to the action.

A claimant can also end things voluntarily by recording an acknowledged notice of withdrawal under section 405.50.

No second notice without permission

Section 405.36: "Once a notice of pending action has been expunged, the claimant may not record another notice of pending action as to the affected property without leave of the court in which the action is pending." In De Martini v. Superior Court (2024) 98 Cal.App.5th 1269, after a first notice had been expunged, the claimant recorded a second one in a separate, later action without leave; the court held it had to be expunged, even though the later action did state a real property claim.

Can I sue for slander of title over a lis pendens?

Often not. Under Civil Code section 47(b)(4), a recorded lis pendens is not privileged unless it "identifies an action previously filed with a court of competent jurisdiction which affects the title or right of possession of real property, as authorized or required by law." When it does, the privilege is absolute. In Park 100, slander of title claims against the attorneys who recorded the notice were barred.

There is a disagreement among the appellate courts about how far the privilege reaches. Palmer v. Zaklama (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 1367 contains language suggesting a lis pendens on a claim lacking evidentiary merit is not privileged. La Jolla Group II v. Bruce (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 461 declined to follow that language, calling it dicta, and held the privilege turns on whether the pleading alleges a real property claim, not on whether the claim has evidentiary merit.

The practical remedy for an owner is the one the statute provides: the motion to expunge, the fee award that comes with winning it, and, where the court requires one, recovery on an undertaking.

A short checklist

If a lis pendens was recorded against your property:

1. Get the recorded notice and the complaint it identifies.
2. Check the signature, the pre-recording mailing, and the recorded proof of service (sections 405.21 through 405.23).
3. Ask whether the complaint, read on its face, pleads a claim to title, possession or an easement.
4. If it does, ask whether the claimant can prove it is more likely than not to win, and whether an undertaking would adequately protect them.
5. Calendar the 20-day writ deadline from service of written notice of any order, and do not schedule a closing until the order can be recorded.

If you are considering recording one:

1. Make sure the lawsuit is filed and pleads a real property claim.
2. Complete the mailing before recording, and record the proof of service with the notice.
3. Be ready to prove probable validity with evidence, on short notice, and to face a fee award on the motion if you cannot.

Lis pendens issues come up across our quiet title and partition and purchase and sale work, including when a co-owner files to force a sale (see your co-owner filed to force a sale). A bogus recorded lien that is not tied to any lawsuit is a different problem with a different statute; see someone filed a bogus lien or UCC filing against you.

Common questions

This article is general information about California law, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Statutes and case law change, and how they apply depends on the specific facts. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. Robert B. Mobasseri, State Bar No. 193193, ROMO Law Group, Encino, California.