Legal Opinion
Hemingway v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 30, 2004No. G033896PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
O’LEARY, J.
Petitioner Rodney Hemingway argues the trial court erred by failing to respond immediately to his motion to disqualify itself pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 1 and by improperly denying his motion as untimely. We agree. In a supplemental petition, Hemingway contends the same court issued an unlawful nunc pro tunc order in an attempt to rectify its failure to act when the motion was first filed. Again, we agree. The petition is granted.
Factual and Procedural Background
On January 5, 2004, the prosecution filed a felony complaint charging Hemingway with one…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Curle v. Superior Court of Shasta CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- People v. Superior Court (Lavi)California Supreme Court · 1993
- Zilog, Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cty.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Stephens v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Frisk v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Entente Design, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Hall v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- In Re WagnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- JONATHON M. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.