Legal Opinion
BURDUSIS v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 13, 2005No. B183034PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WOODS, J.—
SUMMARY
In this writ proceeding, we consider whether Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6, subdivision (a)(2) permits the exercise of a peremptory challenge on remand following reversal of an order denying class certification where remand is for the sole purpose of allowing the trial court to consider the record in light of two new decisions filed after the appeal. We find that no such challenge is permitted.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SYNOPSIS
In a prior appeal, Jeremy Burdusis challenged the trial court’s order denying class certification of his labor and wage violation claims…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Bell v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Peracchi v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Stubblefield Construction Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- First Federal Bank of California v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Jane Doe 8015 v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Rel v. Pac. Bell Mobile Servs., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Akopyan v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2020
- Akopyan v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.