Legal Opinion
Landmark Holding Group, Inc. v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 10, 1987No. B026943PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KLEIN, P. J.
Petitioner is requesting relief from the denial of a peremptory challenge pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6, 1 which denial was based on a finding that the challenge was untimely filed after an ex parte proceeding concerning a temporary restraining order (TRO). Because no determination of a contested factual issue is made during the ex parte proceeding, we conclude the motion to disqualify was timely filed.
Discussion
I. No Bar to a Motion to Disqualify Absent Determination of a Contested Issue of Fact
Section 170.6, subdivision (2) provides: “The fact that a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
- Hospital Council of Northern California v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
- Forbes v. Jose S.California Court of Appeal · 1978
- Kohn v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Zdonek v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Schraer v. Berkeley Property Owners' Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- Barrett v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- SCHOOL DIST. OF OKALOOSA CTY. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- International Union of Operating Engineers v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- Thomas Realty Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.