CALIFORNIA FAMILY LAW
...Procedure Before Trial/Hearing
......Judicial Officers/Referees/Masters
.........Challenge for Cause
............In General
 16 Cards On This Topic:
  • Judge may strike untimely or non-meritorious challenge.
  • The unsolicited receipt of a biased ex parte communication from a third party about the pending matter is not a basis to disqualify a judge for cause.
  • CCP §170.1 disqualifies a judge who holds stock in the parent corporation of a wholly owned subsidiary, where the subsidiary, but not the parent, is a party to the action.
  • Judge must act on a challenge in accordance with CCP §170.3 or 170.4–s/he may not simply ignore it. All subsequent orders were invalid.
  • Judge with no personal or social relationship with H's ex-W's atty, who only officiates at atty's wedding, must disclose the information, but disqualification is not mandated absent additional facts.
  • Fairness and appearance of fairness achieved only if entire case reassigned to another judge; next judge assigned should use the tools available in rules and Fam. Code to bring case under control and move it to completion.
  • Judge's participation in settlement discussions is not a ground for disqualification.
  • If a reasonable person, aware of all the facts, would fairly entertain doubts concerning judge's impartiality, disqualification is mandated.
  • The statutory procedure for disqualification of judges for cause does not apply to final judgments.
  • Judge's failure to respond to challenge for cause is deemed consent to disqualification.
  • May not disqualify entire bench of county because spouse is prominent local lawyer.
  • To show prejudice, disqualification declaration must show actual bias or existence of fixed anticipatory prejudgment. Declarations must be filed as soon as bias manifests self.
  • Bias and prejudice defined.
  • A judge’s preconceived opinions as to liability constitute grounds for disqualification as a matter of law.
  • When challenge for cause can be stricken by trial judge.
  • Judgment and order denying adoption reversed where judge held the opinion that all deaf-mute persons are unfit to be adoptive parents but did not disqualify himself from the matter.


    •