Peremptory Challenge

A CCP 170.6 challenge to a judge may generally be made at any time before a trial or hearing.  The master calendar exception does not apply when a party is informed of the reassignment of the case to a different judge by a clerk's email or telephone message because the party cannot immediately respond to the new judicial assignment by… Read More

This decision holds that an attorney's jury selection notes are not subject to absolute attorney work product protection in connection with a challenge to the jury panel or the judgment based on racial or other discriminatory use of peremptory challenges or claimed the Batson/Wheeler error.  An attorney’s jury selection notes are unlikely to reveal impressions, conclusions, or opinions about the… Read More

Exercising a peremptory challenge against a single prospective juror for a discriminatory reason forbidden by CCP 231.5 is enough to require reveral of the judgment in favor of the party that exercised the discriminatory peremptory.  In 2015, the Legislature amended CCP 231.5 to incorporate FEHA's definition of discrimination (Gov. Code 11135).  This decision broadly interprets the two sections, reading them… Read More

A 170.6 challenge can be effective though filed after the challenged judge issues a search warrant in a criminal case.  The warrant is issued on an ex parte basis and so the judge decides no contested issue of fact in issuing the warrant.  Here, the 170.6 challenge was timely because filed more than 5 days before the hearing on the… Read More

Under CCP 1281.91(b), a party has an absolute right to disqualify a neutral arbitrator (once) without cause if done within 15 days of the arbitrator's providing the parties the disclosures required by CCP 1281.9.  This decision holds that the right to peremptorily disqualify a neutral arbitrator under section 1281.91 is not waivable in advance so that defendant could disqualify the… Read More