Fair and impartial tribunal From Harrison v. Mule Creek 2009 WL 453113 .!. Cal. 2009 Withrow v.

Larkin" 421 #.$. 35" 4%&4'" 95 $.Ct. 145%" 43 L. d.2d 3(5)19'5* )+Con,ededl- a ./air trial in a /air tribunal is a basi, re0uirement o/ due pro,ess.1 In re Murchison" 349 #.$. 133" 13%" '5 $.Ct. %23" %25" 99 L. d. 942)1955*.2*. #nder t3e $upreme La4 o/ t3e Land" 43enever a 5ud6e a,ts 43en t3e 5ud6e does not 3ave sub5e,t matter 5urisdi,tion t3e 5ud6e is en6a6ed in an a,t )o//ense* o/ treason. #.$. v. Will 449 #.$. 200" 21%" 101 $.Ct. 4'1" %% L. d.2d 392" 40% )19(0*7 Co3ens v. 8ir6inia" 19 #.$. )% W3eat* 2%4" 404" 5 L. d 25' )1(21*
Marshall v. Jerrico, Inc., 446 U.S. 238, 100 S.Ct. 1610, 64 L.Ed.2d 182, 24 a!e " #o$r Cas. %&'() 681, 88 La*.Cas. + 33,8,8 %U.S.-ist.Col., (.r 28, 1,80) 93e due pro,ess ,lause entitles a person to an impartial and disinterested tribunal in bot3 ,ivil and ,riminal ,ases. #.$.C.:.Const. :mend. 14. ;1< 93e !ue =ro,ess Clause entitles a person to an impartial and disinterested tribunal in bot3 ,ivil and ,riminal ,ases. 93is re0uirement o/ neutralit- in ad5udi,ative pro,eedin6s sa/e6uards t3e t4o ,entral ,on,erns o/ pro,edural due pro,ess" t3e prevention o/ un5usti/ied or mistaken deprivations and t3e promotion o/ parti,ipation and dialo6ue b- a//e,ted individuals in t3e de,isionmakin6 pro,ess. $ee Carey v. Piphus" 435 #.$. 24'" 259&2%2" 2%%&2%'" 9( $.Ct. 1042" 1043" 1050&1052" 1053" 1054" 55 L. d.2d 252" )19'(*. 93e neutralit- re0uirement 3elps to 6uarantee t3at li/e" libert-" or propert- 4ill not be taken on t3e basis o/ an erroneous or distorted ,on,eption o/ t3e /a,ts or t3e la4. $ee Mathews v. Eldridge" 424 #.$. 319" 344" 9% $.Ct. (93" 90'" 4' L. d.2d 1( )19'%*. :t t3e same time" it preserves bot3 t3e appearan,e and realit- o/ /airness" +6eneratin6 t3e /eelin6" so important to a popular 6overnment" t3at 5usti,e 3as been done"2Joint Anti- ascist Co!!ittee v. Mc"rath" 341 #.$. 123" 1'2" '1 $.Ct. %24" %49" 95 L. d. (1' )1951* )Frank/urter" >." ,on,urrin6*" b- ensurin6 t3at no person 4ill be deprived o/ 3is interests in t3e absen,e o/ a pro,eedin6 in 43i,3 3e ma- present 3is ,ase 4it3 assuran,e t3at t3e arbiter is not predisposed to /ind a6ainst 3im. 93e re0uirement o/ neutralit- 3as been 5ealousl- 6uarded b- t3is Court. ?n #u!ey v. $hio% supra" t3e Court reversed ,onvi,tions rendered b- t3e ma-or o/ a to4n 43en t3e ma-or@s salar- 4as paid in part b- /ees and ,osts levied b- 3im a,tin6 in a 5udi,ial ,apa,it-. 93e Court stated t3at t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause 4ould not permit an+pro,edure 43i,3 4ould o//er a possible temptation to t3e avera6e man as a 5ud6e to /or6et t3e burden o/ proo/ re0uired to ,onvi,t t3e de/endant" or 43i,3 mi63t lead 3im not to 3old t3e balan,e ni,e" ,lear and true bet4een t3e state and t3e a,,used.2 2'3 #.$." at 532" 4' $.Ct." at 444. #u!ey 4as applied in Ward v. &illage o' Monroeville% supra" /243 to invalidate a pro,edure b- 43i,3 sums produ,ed /rom a ma-or@s ,ourt a,,ounted /or a substantial portion o/ muni,ipal revenues" even t3ou63 t3e ma-or@s salar- 4as not au6mented b- t3ose sums. 93e /orbidden +possible temptation"2 4e ,on,luded" is also present +43en t3e ma-or@s eAe,utive responsibilities /or villa6e /inan,es ma- make 3im partisan to maintain t3e 3i63 level o/ ,ontribution /rom t3e ma-or@s ,ourt.2 409 #.$." at %0" 93 $.Ct." at (3. We 3ave emplo-ed t3e same prin,iple in a variet- o/ settin6s" demonstratin6 t3e po4er/ul and independent ,onstitutional interest in /air ad5udi,ative pro,edure.FB2 ?ndeed" +5usti,e must satis/- t3e appearan,e o/ 5usti,e"2 $''utt v. (nited )tates" 34( #.$. 11" 14" '5 $.Ct. 11" 13" 99 L. d. 11 )1954*" and t3is +strin6ent rule ma- sometimes

bar t3e 349 41(

trial b- 5ud6es 43o 3ave no a,tual bias and 43o 4ould do t3eir ver- best to 4ei63 s,ales o/ 5usti,e e0uall- bet4een ,ontendin6 parties"2 //1614In re Murchison" #.$. 133" 13%" '5 $.Ct. %23" %25" 99 L. d. 942 )1955*. $ee also #aylor v. *ayes" #.$. 4((" 94 $.Ct. 2%9'" 41 L. d.2d (9' )19'4*. FB2. For eAample" 4e 3ave invalidated a s-stem in 43i,3 5usti,es o/ t3e pea,e 4ere paid /or issuan,e but not /or nonissuan,e o/ sear,3 4arrants" Connally v. "eorgia% +,- (.). ,+.% -/ ).Ct. .+0% .1 L.Ed.,d +++ 23-//4 2per ,uriam45 prohi6ited the trial o' a de'endant 6e'ore a 7udge who has previously held the de'endant in conte!pt% 9a-lor v. Ha-es% +38 (.). +88% -+ ).Ct. ,0-/% +3 L.Ed.,d 8-/ 23-/+45 Ma-berr- v. =enns-lvania% +11 (.). +..% -3 ).Ct. +--% ,/ L.Ed.,d .,9 23-/345 'or6idden a state ad!inistrative 6oard consisting o' opto!etrists in private practice 'ro! hearing charges 'iled against licensed opto!etrists co!peting with 6oard !e!6ers% Cibson v. Derr-3ill% +33 (.). .0+% ./8-./-% -9 ).Ct. 308-% 30-/-30-8% 90 L.Ed.,d +88 23-/945 and prohi6ited a parole o''icer 'ro! !aking the deter!ination whether reasona6le grounds e:ist 'or the revocation o' parole% Morrisse- v. Dre4er% +18 (.). +/3% +8.-+80% -, ).Ct. ,.-9% ,01,-,019% 99 L.Ed.,d +8+ 23-/,4.

Clerk o/ >ud6e Class talked to attorne- o/ re,ord and 6ave 3im a spe,ial /aA number.
(etna Li0e Ins. Co. v. Lavoie, 412 U.S. 813, 106 S.Ct. 1280, 8, L.Ed.2d 823, 24 USL 4381 %U.S.(la., (.r 22, 1,86) :,tion 4as brou63t ,3ar6in6 3ealt3 insurer 4it3 bad /ait3 re/usal to pa- ,laim. :/ter t4o remands" 3'4 $o.2d 310" 405 $o.2d 1'" t3e Cir,uit Court" Mobile Count-" Mi,3ael . Eo63b-" >." rendered 5ud6ment on 5ur- verdi,t /or insured /or ,ompensator- and punitive dama6es" and insurer appealed. 93e :labama $upreme Court" 4'0 $o.2d 10%0" a//irmed" and insurer appealed. 93e $upreme Court" C3ie/ >usti,e Dur6er" 3eld t3atF )1* Court 3ad 5urisdi,tion7 )2* :labama $upreme Court >usti,e@s 6eneral /rustration 4it3 insuran,e ,ompanies t3at 4ere dilator- in pa-in6 ,laims did not reveal bias re0uirin6 dis0uali/i,ation under due pro,ess ,lause7 )3* >usti,e@s parti,ipation in ,ase violated insurer@s due pro,ess ri63ts7 )4* t3ere 4as no basis /or ,on,ludin6 t3at ot3er >usti,es 4ere dis0uali/ied7 and )5* appearan,e o/ 5usti,e 4ould be best served b- va,atin6 de,ision and remandin6 /or /urt3er pro,eedin6s. $upreme Court 3ad 5urisdi,tion over 0uestion o/ 43et3er :labama $upreme Court >usti,e@s parti,ipation in ,ase violated insurer@s ri63ts under due pro,ess ,lause o/ Fourteent3 :mendment ;#.$.C.:. Const.:mend. 14<" 43ere :labama $upreme Court@s order den-in6 re,usal motions ,learl- demonstrated ,ourt rea,3ed merits o/ insurer@s ,onstitutional ,3allen6e" and insurer raised t3is issue as soon as it dis,overed /a,ts relatin6 to >usti,e@s state a,tions a6ainst insuran,e ,ompanies alle6in6 bad&/ait3 /ailure to pa- ,laims. ?nsurer@s ri63ts under due pro,ess ,lause o/ Fourteent3 :mendment ;#.$.C.:. Const.:mend. 14< 4ere violated b- >usti,e@s parti,ipation in a,tion seekin6 punitive dama6es /or insurer@s alle6ed bad&/ait3 re/usal to pa- valid ,laim" 43ere >usti,e" at time 3e ,ast de,idin6 vote and aut3ored ,ourt@s opinion" 3ad pendin6 at least one versimilar bad /ait3 re/usal&to&pa- la4suit a6ainst an insurer in anot3er state ,ourt. #pon determinin6 t3at :labama $upreme Court >usti,e 4as dis0uali/ied /rom parti,ipation in ,ase" appearan,e o/ 5usti,e 4ould be best served b- va,atin6 de,ision and remandin6 /or /urt3er pro,eedin6s" 43ere >usti,e ,ast de,idin6 vote and aut3ored ,ourt@s opinion.

W3en appellant insurer re/used to pa- t3e /ull amount o/ a 3ospital bill in,urred bappellees" t3e- brou63t suit in an :labama state ,ourt" seekin6 bot3 pa-ment o/ t3e /ull amount and punitive dama6es /or appellant@s alle6ed bad&/ait3 re/usal to pa- a valid ,laim. 93e 5ur- a4arded G3.5 million in punitive dama6es. 93e :labama $upreme Court a//irmed" 5 to 4" in a per curia! opinion 4ritten b- >usti,e mbr-. :ppellant t3en /iled an appli,ation /or re3earin6" and" be/ore t3e appli,ation 4as a,ted on" learned t3at 43ile t3e ,ase 4as pendin6 be/ore t3e :labama $upreme Court" >usti,e mbr- 3ad /iled t4o a,tions in an :labama ,ourt a6ainst insuran,e ,ompanies alle6in6 bad&/ait3 /ailure to pa- ,laims and seekin6 punitive dama6es. Hne o/ t3e a,tions 4as a ,lass a,tion on be3al/ o/ all state emplo-ees insured under a 6roup plan b- Dlue Cross&Dlue $3ield. :ppellant t3en /iled motions ,3allen6in6" on due pro,ess 6rounds" >usti,e mbr-@s parti,ipation in t3e per curia! de,ision and 3is ,ontinued parti,ipation in ,onsiderin6 t3e re3earin6 appli,ation" and also alle6in6 t3at all 5usti,es on t3e ,ourt s3ould re,use t3emselves be,ause o/ t3eir interests as potential ,lass members in t3e Dlue Cross suit. 93e ,ourt denied t3ese motions" and also t3e re3earin6 appli,ation. $ubse0uentl-" t3e Dlue Cross suit 4as settled" and >usti,e mbr- re,eived G30"000 under t3at settlement. *eld; 1. 93is Court 3as 5urisdi,tion over t3e 0uestion 43et3er >usti,e mbr-@s parti,ipation in t3is ,ase violated appellant@s ri63ts under t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause o/ t3e Fourteent3 :mendment" 43ere t3e :labama $upreme Court@s order den-in6 t3e re,usal motions ,learl- demonstrated t3at t3e ,ourt rea,3ed t3e merits o/ appellant@s ,onstitutional ,3allen6e" and 43ere appellant raised t3is issue as soon as it dis,overed t3e /a,ts relatin6 to >usti,e mbr-@s personal la4suits. =. 15(4. 2. :ppellant@s alle6ations" on a 6eneral basis" o/ >usti,e mbr-@s bias and pre5udi,e a6ainst insuran,e ,ompanies t3at 4ere dilator- in pa-in6 ,laims" 4ere insu//i,ient to establis3 an- ,onstitutional violation. =p. 15(4&15(5. 3. 93e re,ord" 3o4ever" presents more t3an mere alle6ations o/ bias and pre5udi,e" and supports t3e ,on,lusion t3at >usti,e mbr-@s parti,ipation in t3is ,ase violated appellant@s due pro,ess ri63ts. :ll o/ t3e issues in t3is ,ase 4ere present in 3is Dlue Cross suit" and t3e ver- /814 nature o/ t3at suit pla,ed in issue 43et3er 3e 4ould 3ave to establis3 t3at 3e 4as entitled to a dire,ted verdi,t on t3e underl-in6 ,laims t3at Dlue Cross re/used to pa- be/ore 6ainin6 punitive dama6es. Moreover" t3e a//irman,e in t3is ,ase o/ t3e lar6est punitive dama6es a4ard ever issued in :labama on pre,isel- t3e t-pe o/ ,laim raised in t3e Dlue Cross suit +raised t3e stakes2 /or Dlue Cross in t3at suit to >usti,e mbr-@s bene/it. 93us" 3is opinion /or t3e :labama $upreme Court 3ad t3e ,lear and immediate e//e,t o/ en3an,in6 bot3 t3e le6al status and t3e settlement value o/ 3is o4n ,ase. W3en 3e made t3e 5ud6ment in t3is ,ase" 3e a,ted as +a 5ud6e in 3is o4n ,ase.2 His interest in t3is ,ase 4as + .dire,t" personal" substantial" ;and< pe,uniar-"1 2 Ward v. &illage o' Monroeville% 409 #.$. 5'" %0" 93 $.Ct. (0" (3" 34 L. d.2d 2%' )19'2*" as s3o4n b- t3e sum 3e re,eived in settlement o/ t3e Dlue Cross suit. =p. 15(5&15('. 4. 93ere is no basis /or ,on,ludin6 t3at t3e 5usti,es o/ t3e :labama $upreme Court ot3er t3an >usti,e mbr- 4ere dis0uali/ied under t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause. W3ile t3ose 5usti,es mi63t ,on,eivabl- 3ave 3ad a sli63t pe,uniar- interest in t3is ,ase be,ause o/ t3eir possible in,lusion in t3e Dlue Cross ,lass a,tion" t3at interest //1282 ,annot properl- be ,3ara,teriIed as +dire,t" personal" substantial" ;and< pe,uniar-.2 :n- interest t3at t3e- mi63t 3ave 3ad 43en t3e- passed on t3e re3earin6 appli,ation 4as 3i63l- spe,ulative and ,ontin6ent" sin,e at t3at time t3e trial ,ourt in t3e Dlue Cross suit 3ad not even ,erti/ied a ,lass" let alone a4arded an- ,lass relie/ o/ a pe,uniar- nature. =p. 15('&15((.

5. De,ause o/ >usti,e mbr-@s leadin6 role in t3e de,ision under revie4" t3e +appearan,e o/ 5usti,e2 4ill best be served b- va,atin6 t3e de,ision and remandin6 /or /urt3er pro,eedin6s. =p. 15((&15(9. 4'0 $o.2d 10%0 ):la.19(4*" va,ated and remanded. 93e 0uestion presented is 43et3er t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause o/ t3e Fourteent3 :mendment 4as violated 43en a 5usti,e o/ t3e :labama $upreme Court de,lined to re,use 3imsel/ /rom parti,ipation in t3at ,ourt@s ,onsideration o/ t3is ,ase. 93is appeal arises out o/ liti6ation ,on,ernin6 an insuran,e poli,- issued bappellant ,overin6 appellees Mar6aret and Jo6er Lavoie. ?n >anuar- 19''" Mrs. Lavoie 4as eAamined b- 3er p3-si,ian" !r. !ou6las" be,ause o/ various ailments. $3ortlt3erea/ter" on !r. !ou6las@ re,ommendation" s3e 4as admitted to t3e Mobile ?n/irmarHospital" 43ere s3e remained /or 23 da-s /or a batter- o/ tests. :/ter 3er dis,3ar6e" t3e 3ospital /or4arded t3e appropriate /orms and medi,al re,ords alon6 4it3 a bill /or G3"02(.25 to appellant@s lo,al o//i,e in Mobile" :labama. 93e lo,al o//i,e re/used to pa- t3e entire amount" tenderin6 pa-ment /or onl- G1"%50.22. 93e lo,al o//i,e also sent a letter to t3e national o//i,e" ,on,ludin6 t3at t3e 23&da3ospitaliIation 4as unne,essar- and t3at +;3<ospital re,ords do not indi,ate an-t3in6 to t3e ,ontrar-"2 even t3ou63 all t3e 3ospital re,ords 3ad not -et been re,eived. :t one point" t3e national o//i,e told t3e lo,al o//i,e to ,ontinue den-in6 t3e re0uest /or /ull pa-ment" but added t3at +i/ t3e- a,t like t3e- are 6oin6 to /ile suit"2 t3e /ile s3ould be revie4ed. /816 :ppellees /iled suit a6ainst appellant" seekin6 bot3 pa-ment o/ t3e remainder o/ t3eir ori6inal ,laim and punitive dama6es /or t3e tort o/ bad&/ait3 re/usal to pa- a valid ,laim. 93e trial ,ourt dismissed /or /ailure to state a ,ause o/ a,tion 4it3 respe,t to t3e bad /ait3 ,ounts. :ppellees appealed to t3e :labama $upreme Court" 43i,3 remanded on t3e 6round t3at it 3ad +not /ore,losed t3e possibilit- o/ re,overin tort /or t3e bad /ait3 re/usal o/ an insurer to pa- le6itimate bene/its due under an insuran,e poli,-.2 Lavoie v. Aetna Li'e < Casualty Co.% 3'4 $o.2d 310" 312 )19'9*. Hn remand" t3e trial ,ourt entered 5ud6ment /or appellees on t3e unpaid portion o/ t3eir ,laim and 6ranted summar- 5ud6ment /or appellant on t3e bad&/ait3 ,laim. 93e :labama $upreme Court a6ain reversed" eAplainin6 t3at on t3at same da- it 3ad +re,o6niIed t3e intentional tort o/ bad /ait3 in /irst part- insuran,e a,tions.2 Lavoie v. Aetna Li'e < Casualty Co.% 405 $o.2d 1'" 1( )19(1* ),itin6 Chavers v. =ational )ecurity ire < Casualty Co.% 405 $o.2d 1 )19(1**. Hn remand" appellees@ bad&/ait3 ,laim 4as submitted to a 5ur-. 93e 5ur- a4arded G3.5 million in punitive dama6es. 93e trial 5ud6e denied appellant@s motion /or 5ud6ment n.o.v. or" alternativel-" /or remittitur. :n unsi6ned per curia! opinion eApressed t3e vie4 o/ /ive 5usti,es t3at t3e eviden,e demonstrated t3at appellant 3ad a,ted in bad /ait3. 93e ,ourt interpreted its prior opinions as not re0uirin6 dismissal o/ a bad&/ait3&re/usal&to&pa- ,laim even 43ere a dire,ted verdi,t a6ainst t3e insurer on t3e underl-in6 ,laim 4as impossible. 93e opinion also ,lari/ied t3e issue o/ 43et3er a bad&/ait3 suit ,ould be maintained 43ere t3e insurer 3ad made a partial pa-ment o/ t3e underl-in6 ,laim. :lt3ou63 earlier opinions o/ t3e ,ourt 3ad re/used to allo4 bad&/ait3 suits in su,3 ,ir,umstan,es" partial pa-ment 4as not dispositive o/ /811 t3e bad&/ait3 issue. 93e ,ourt also re5e,ted appellant@s ar6ument t3at t3e punitive dama6es a4ard 4as so eA,essive t3at it must be set aside. 93e ,ourt@s opinion 4as released on !e,ember '" 19(47 on !e,ember 21" 19(4" appellant /iled a timel- appli,ation /or re3earin6. Hn Februar- 14" 19(5" be/ore its appli,ation 3ad been a,ted on" appellant learned t3at 43ile t3e instant a,tion 4as pendin6 be/ore

t3e :labama $upreme Court" >usti,e mbr-" one o/ t3e /ive 5usti,es 5oinin6 t3e per curia! opinion" 3ad /iled t4o a,tions in t3e Cir,uit Court /or >e//erson Count-" :labama" a6ainst insuran,e ,ompanies. Dot3 o/ t3ese a,tions alle6ed bad&/ait3 /ailure to pa- a ,laim. Hne suit arose out o/ Mar-land Casualt- Compan-@s alle6ed /ailure to pa- /or t3e loss o/ a valuable mink ,oat7 t3e ot3er suit" 43i,3 >usti,e mbr- brou63t on be3al/ o/ 3imsel/ and as a representative o/ a ,lass o/ all ot3er :labama state emplo-ees insured under a 6roup plan b- Dlue Cross&Dlue $3ield o/ :labama )in,ludin6" apparentl-" all 5usti,es o/ t3e :labama $upreme Court*" alle6ed a 4ill/ul and intentional plan to 4it33old pa-ment on valid ,laims. Dot3 suits sou63t punitive dama6es. Hn Februar- 21" 19(5" appellant /iled t4o motions in t3e :labama $upreme Court" ,3allen6in6 >usti,e mbr-@s parti,ipation in t3e ,ourt@s !e,ember '" 19(4" de,ision and 3is ,ontinued parti,ipation in ,onsiderin6 appellant@s appli,ation /or re3earin6. 93e motion also alle6ed t3at all 5usti,es on t3e ,ourt s3ould re,use t3emselves be,ause o/ t3eir interests as potential ,lass members in >usti,e mbr-@s suit a6ainst Dlue Cross. Hn Mar,3 (" 19(5" t3e ,ourt unanimousl- denied/818 t3e re,usal motions. 93e brie/ order stated t3at ea,3 5usti,e 3ad voted individuall- on t3e matter o/ 43et3er 3e s3ould re,use 3imsel/ and t3at ea,3 5usti,e 3ad voted not to do so. :t t3e same time" b- a 5&to&4 division" t3e ,ourt denied appellant@s motion /or re3earin6. C3ie/ >usti,e 9orbert 4rote separatel-" eAplainin6 t3at alt3ou63 been in/luen,ed b- 3is possible members3ip in t3e putative ,lass mbr-@s suit a6ainst Dlue Cross" 3e 4as nonet3eless noti/-in6 t3e 43ere t3at suit 4as pendin6 not to permit 3im to be in,luded in >usti,e MaddoA also 4rote separatel-" takin6 similar a,tion. 3is vie4s 3ad not alle6ed in >usti,e Clerk o/ t3e ,ourt t3e alle6ed ,lass.

Hn Mar,3 20" 19(5" appellant obtained a ,op- o/ t3e trans,ript o/ >usti,e mbr-@s deposition" taken on >anuar- 10" 19(5" in ,onne,tion 4it3 3is Dlue Cross suit. 93e deposition revealed t3at >usti,e mbr- 3ad aut3ored t3e per curia! opinion in t3is ,ase over an (& or 9&mont3 period durin6 43i,3 3is ,ivil a,tion a6ainst Dlue Cross 4as bein6 prose,uted. >usti,e mbr- also stated t3at" durin6 t3at period" 3e 3ad re,eived +leads2 /rom people 4it3 re6ard to 3is bad&/ait3 a,tion a6ainst Dlue Cross and t3at 3e put t3em in tou,3 4it3 3is attorne-. Finall-" >usti,e mbr- revealed /rustration 4it3 insuran,e ,ompanies. For eAample" 43en asked i/ 3e 3ad ever 3ad an- di//i,ult- 4it3 pro,essin6 ,laims" >usti,e mbr- //1284 retortedF +;9<3at is a sill- 0uestion. For -ears and -ears. ;1< We are satis/ied as to t3e Court@s 5urisdi,tion over t3e 0uestion o/ 43et3er >usti,e mbr-@s parti,ipation violated appellant@s Fourteent3 :mendment due pro,ess ri63ts. :ppellees ar6ue t3at t3e :labama $upreme Court did not rea,3 t3is issue be,ause it 4as raised onl- a/ter t3e ,ourt@s de,ision on t3e merits. We re5e,t t3at ,ontention as at odds 4it3 t3e re,ord. Hn Mar,3 (" 19(5" t3e ,ourt entered t3e /ollo4in6 orderF +#pon ,onsideration" t3e Court is o/ t3e opinion t3at under t3e alle6ation o/ said motion in t3is ,ase ea,3 5usti,e s3ould vote individuall- on t3e matter o/ 43et3er or not 3e or s3e is dis0uali/ied and s3ould re,use. a,3 5usti,e 3avin6 voted not to re,use" +?9 ?$" 9H J FHJ " HJ! J ! t3at t3e .Motion /or !is0uali/i,ation and Motion /or Wit3dra4al o/ Hpinion o/ !e,ember '" 19(4" and /or Hearin6 !e Bovo1 be ... denied.2 :pp. to >uris. $tatement %4a. 93is order ,learl- demonstrates t3at t3e :labama ,ourt rea,3ed t3e merits o/ appellant@s ,onstitutional ,3allen6e" albeit on a 5usti,e&b-&5usti,e basis. Moreover" appellant raised t3is issue as soon as it dis,overed t3e /a,ts relatin6 to >usti,e

mbr-@s personal la4suits. Hn t3is re,ord" 4e ,on,lude 5urisdi,tion is proper. $ee /820(lster County Court v. Allen% 442 #.$. 140" 14'&154" 99 $.Ct. 2213" 2219& 2223" %0 L. d.2d ''' )19'9*7 Ward v. &illage o' Monroeville% 409 #.$. 5'" %1" 93 $.Ct. (0" (3" 34 L. d.2d 2%' )19'2*. :ppellant ,ontends >usti,e mbr-@s 6eneral 3ostilit- to4ards insuran,e ,ompanies t3at 4ere dilator- in pa-in6 ,laims" as eApressed in 3is deposition" re0uires a ,on,lusion t3at t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause 4as violated b- 3is parti,ipation in t3e disposition o/ t3is ,ase. 93e Court 3as re,o6niIed t3at not +;a<ll 0uestions o/ 5udi,ial 0uali/i,ation ... involve ,onstitutional validit-. 93us matters o/ kins3ip" personal bias" state poli,-" remoteness o/ interest" 4ould seem 6enerall- to be matters merelo/ le6islative dis,retion.2 #u!ey v. $hio% 2'3 #.$. 510" 523" 4' $.Ct. 43'" 441" '1 L. d. '49 )192'*7 see also #C v. Ce!ent Institute% 333 #.$. %(3" '02" %( $.Ct. '93" (04" 92 L. d. 1010 )194(* )+;M<ost matters relatin6 to 5udi,ial dis0uali/i,ation ;do< not rise to a ,onstitutional level2*. Moreover" t3e traditional ,ommon&la4 rule 4as t3at dis0uali/i,ation /or bias or pre5udi,e 4as not permitted. $ee" e.g.% Cly!a v. >ennedy% %4 Conn. 310" 29 :. 539 )1(94*. $ee 6enerall- Frank" !is0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6es" 5% Kale L.>. %05 )194'*. :s bla,kstone//1282 put it" +t3e la4 4ill not suppose a possibilit- o/ bias or /avour in a 5ud6e" 43o is alread- s4orn to administer impartial 5usti,e" and 43ose aut3orit- 6reatl- depends upon t3at presumption and idea.2 3 W. Dla,kstone" Commentaries L3%1. 93e more re,ent trend 3as been to4ards t3e adoption o/ statutes t3at permit dis0uali/i,ation /or bias or pre5udi,e. $ee ?erger v. (nited )tates% 255 #.$. 22" 31" 41 $.Ct. 230" 232" %5 L. d. 4(1 )1921* )en/or,in6 statute dis0uali/-in6 /ederal 5ud6es in ,ertain ,ir,umstan,es /or personal bias or pre5udi,e*. $ee also :D: Code o/ >udi,ial Condu,t" Canon 3C)1*)a* )19(0* )+: 5ud6e s3ould dis0uali/- 3imsel/ ... 43ere 3e 3as a personal bias or pre5udi,e ,on,ernin6 a part-2*. Dut t3at alone 4ould not be su//i,ient basis /or imposin6 a ,onstitutional re0uirement under t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause. /821 We 3eld in Patterson v. =ew @ork% 432 #.$. 19'" 201&202" 9' $.Ct. 2319" 2322&2323" 53 L. d.2d 2(1 )19''* ),itations omitted*" t3at +it is normall- 4it3in t3e po4er o/ t3e $tate to re6ulate pro,edures under 43i,3 its la4s are ,arried out ... and its de,ision in t3is re6ard is not sub5e,t to pros,ription under t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause unless it o//ends some prin,iple o/ 5usti,e so rooted in t3e traditions and ,ons,ien,e o/ our people as to be ranked as /undamental.2 ;2<;3< We need not de,ide 43et3er alle6ations o/ bias or pre5udi,e b- a 5ud6e o/ t3e t-pe 4e 3ave 3ere 4ould ever be su//i,ient under t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause to /or,e re,usal. Certainl- onl- in t3e most eAtreme o/ ,ases 4ould dis0uali/i,ation on t3is basis be ,onstitutionall- re0uired" and appellant@s ar6uments 3ere /all 4ell belo4 t3at level. :ppellant su66ests t3at >usti,e mbr-@s 6eneral /rustration 4it3 insuran,e ,ompanies reveals a dis0uali/-in6 bias" but it is likel- t3at man- ,laimants 3ave developed 3ostile /eelin6s /rom t3e /rustration in a4aitin6 settlement o/ insuran,e ,laims. ?nsurers" on t3eir side" 3ave no eas- task" espe,iall- 43en tr-in6 to evaluate 43et3er ,ertain medi,al dia6nosti, tests or prolon6ed 3ospitaliIation 4ere indi,ated. ?n turn" t3e p3-si,ians and sur6eons" 43et3er impelled b- valid medi,al 5ud6ment or b- appre3ension as to /uture malpra,ti,e ,laims&or some ,ombination o/ t3e t4o&similarl- /a,e di//i,ult problems. :ppellant@s alle6ations o/ bias and pre5udi,e on t3is 6eneral basis" 3o4ever" are insu//i,ient to establis3 an- ,onstitutional violation. D 93e re,ord in t3is ,ase presents more t3an mere alle6ations o/ bias and pre5udi,e" 3o4ever. :ppellant also presses a ,laim t3at >usti,e mbr- 3ad a more dire,t stake in t3e out,ome o/ t3is ,ase. ?n #u!ey% 43ile re,o6niIin6 t3at t3e Constitution does not

rea,3 ever- issue o/ 5udi,ial 0uali/i,ation" t3e Court ,on,luded t3at +it ,ertainlviolates t3e Fourteent3 :mendment ... to sub5e,t ;a person@s< libert- or /822 propert- to t3e 5ud6ment o/ a ,ourt t3e 5ud6e o/ 43i,3 3as a dire,t" personal" substantial" pe,uniar- interest in rea,3in6 a ,on,lusion a6ainst 3im in 3is ,ase.2 2'3 #.$." at 523" 4' $.Ct." at 441. More t3an 30 -ears a6o >usti,e Dla,k" speakin6 /or t3e Court" rea,3ed a similar ,on,lusion and re,o6niIed t3at under t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause no 5ud6e +,an be a 5ud6e in 3is o4n ,ase ;or be< permitted to tr- ,ases 43ere 3e 3as an interest in t3e out,ome.2 In re Murchison% 349 #.$. 133" 13%" '5 $.Ct. %23" %25" 99 L. d. 942 )1955*. He 4ent on to a,kno4led6e t3at 43at de6ree or kind o/ interest is su//i,ient to dis0uali/- a 5ud6e /rom sittin6 +,annot be de/ined 4it3 pre,ision.2 I6id. Bonet3eless" a reasonable /ormulation o/ t3e issue is 43et3er t3e +situation is one .43i,3 4ould o//er a possible temptation to t3e avera6e ... 5ud6e to ... lead 3im not to 3old t3e balan,e ni,e" ,lear and true.1 2 Ward v. &illage o' Monroeville% supra% 409 #.$." at %0" 93 $.Ct." at (3. 93e de,ision under revie4 /irml- establis3ed t3at punitive dama6es ,ould be obtained in :labama in a situation 43ere t3e insured@s ,laim is not /ull- approved and onlpartial pa-ment o/ t3e underl-in6 ,laim 3ad been made. =rior to t3e de,ision under revie4" t3e :labama $upreme Court 3ad not ,learl- re,o6niIed an- ,laim /or tortious in5ur- in su,3 ,ir,umstan,es7 moreover" it 3ad a//irmativel- re,o6niIed t3at partial pa-ment 4as eviden,e o/ 6ood /ait3 on t3e part o/ t3e insurer. )e:ton v. Li6erty =ational Li'e Ins. Co.% 405 $o.2d 1(" 22 )19(1*. 93e :labama ,ourt also 3eld t3at a bad&/ait3&re/usal&to&pa- ,ause o/ a,tion 4ill lie in :labama even 43ere t3e insured is not entitled to a dire,ted verdi,t on t3e underl-in6 ,laim" a ,on,lusion t3at at t3e least ,lari/ied t3e t3rust o/ an earlier 3oldin6. C/. =ational )avings Li'e Ins. Co. v. Autton% supra% at 13%2. Finall-" t3e ,ourt re/used to set aside as eA,essive a punitive dama6es a4ard o/ G3.5 million. 93e lar6est punitive a4ard previousl- a//irmed b- t3at ,ourt 4as G100"000" a /i6ure remitted /rom G1.1 million as +obviousl- t3e result o/ passion and pre5udi,e on t3e part o/ t3e 5ur-.2 "ul' Atlantic Li'e Ins. Co. v. ?arnes% 405 $o.2d 91%" 92% )19(1*. :ll o/ t3ese issues 4ere present in >usti,e mbr-@s la4suit a6ainst Dlue Cross. His ,omplaint sou63t re,over- /or partial pa-ment o/ ,laims. :lso t3e ver- nature o/ >usti,e mbr-@s suit pla,ed in issue 43et3er 3e 4ould 3ave to establis3 t3at 3e 4as entitled to a dire,ted verdi,t on t3e underl-in6 ,laims t3at 3e alle6ed Dlue Cross re/used to pa- be/ore 6ainin6 punitive dama6es. Finall-" t3e a//irman,e o/ t3e lar6est punitive dama6es a4ard ever )b- a substantial mar6in* on pre,isel- t3e t-pe o/ ,laim raised in t3e Dlue Cross /824 suit undoubtedl- +raised t3e stakes2 /or Dlue Cross in t3at suit" to t3e bene/it o/ >usti,e mbr-. 93us" >usti,e mbr-@s opinion /or t3e :labama $upreme Court 3ad t3e ,lear and immediate e//e,t o/ en3an,in6 bot3 t3e le6al status and t3e settlement value o/ 3is o4n ,ase. We need not de,ide 43et3er to ,3ara,teriIe t3e de,ision under revie4 as a ,3an6e in :labama la4 or a ,lari/i,ation o/ t3e ,ontours o/ t3at la4" a 5ud6ment 4e are obviousl- not ,alled on to make. We 3old simpl- t3at 43en >usti,e mbr- made t3at 5ud6ment" 3e a,ted as +a 5ud6e in 3is o4n ,ase.2 Murchison% supra% 349 #.$." at 13%" '5 $.Ct." at %25. We also 3old t3at 3is interest 4as + .dire,t" personal" substantial" ;and< pe,uniar-.1 2 Ward% supra% 409 #.$." at %0" 93 $.Ct." at (3 )0uotin6 #u!ey v. $hio% 2'3 #.$." at 523" 4' $.Ct." at 441*. >usti,e mbr-@s ,omplaint a6ainst Dlue Cross sou63t +,ompensator- dama6e /or brea,3 o/ ,ontra,t" in,onvenien,e" emotional and mental distress" disappointment" pain and su//erin62 in addition to punitive dama6es //1281 /or 3imsel/ and /or t3e ,lass. $oon a/ter t3e opinion o/ t3e :labama $upreme Court in

t3is ,ase 4as announ,ed" Dlue Cross paid >usti,e mbr- 43at 3e ,3ara,teriIed in an intervie4 as +a tid- sum"2 Jepl- Drie/ /or :ppellant 10" n. (" to settle t3e suit. Je,ords lod6ed 4it3 t3is Court s3o4 t3at >usti,e mbr- re,eived G30"000" 43i,3 4as deposited b- 3is attorne- dire,tl- into >usti,e mbr-@s personal a,,ount. 9o be sure" a portion o/ t3is mone- ma- 3ave 6one to >usti,e mbr-@s attorne- in ,onne,tion 4it3 t3e ,ase" even t3ou63 some materials be/ore us su66est t3at 3is attorne- a6reed to 4aive 3is /ee. !eposition o/ :. Cre- 9ill in Clay v. =ationwide Insurance Co.% C8&'(& 114( )Cir.Ct. o/ Mobile Ct-." :la.*" pp. 2'&29. We are also a4are t3at >usti,e mbrobtained a statement in t3e settlement a6reement to t3e e//e,t t3at +;t<3e primarob5e,t o/ t3e institution o/ t3is suit ... 4as to emp3asiIe to de/endant Dlue Cross ... t3at ,laims under t3e =lan be pro,essed and determined b- Dlue Cross in a timel- and e//i,ient manner"2 even t3ou63 t3at t-pe o/ relie/ 4as not sou63t spe,i/i,all- in t3e ,omplaint /822 43ile monetar- relie/ 4as. We nonet3eless 3old t3at t3e +tid- sum2 t3at >usti,e mbr- re,eived dire,tl- is su//i,ient to establis3 t3e substantialit- o/ 3is interest 3ere. We ,on,lude t3at >usti,e mbr-@s parti,ipation in t3is ,ase violated appellant@s due pro,ess ri63ts as eApli,ated in #u!ey% Murchison% and Ward. We ,on,lude t3at >usti,e mbr-@s parti,ipation in t3is ,ase violated appellant@s due pro,ess ri63ts as eApli,ated in #u!ey% Murchison% and Ward. We make ,lear t3at 4e are not re0uired to de,ide 43et3er in /a,t >usti,e mbr- 4as in/luen,ed" but onl43et3er sittin6 on t3e ,ase t3en be/ore t3e $upreme Court o/ :labama + .4ould o//er a possible temptation to t3e avera6e ... 5ud6e to ... lead 3im to not to 3old t3e balan,e ni,e" ,lear and true.1 2 Ward% 409 #.$." at %0" 93 $.Ct." at (3 )0uotin6 #u!ey v. $hio% supra% 2'3 #.$." at 532" 4' $.Ct." at 444*. 93e !ue =ro,ess Clause +ma- sometimes bar trial b- 5ud6es 43o 3ave no a,tual bias and 43o 4ould do t3eir verbest to 4ei63 t3e s,ales o/ 5usti,e e0uall- bet4een ,ontendin6 parties. Dut to per/orm its 3i63 /un,tion in t3e best 4a-" .5usti,e must satis/- t3e appearan,e o/ 5usti,e.1 2 Murchison% 349 #.$." at 13%" '5 $.Ct." at %25 ),itation omitted*. In re M$rchison, 34, U.S. 133, 12 S.Ct. 623, ,, L.Ed. ,42 %U.S.Mich., Ma3 16, 1,22)

appearan,e o/ 5usti,e
Contempt pro,eedin6s arisin6 out o/ 4itnesses@ ,ondu,t be/ore a Mi,3i6an 6rand 5ur-. 93e Jeporter@s Court o/ !etroit entered 5ud6ments o/ ,onvi,tion and de/endants appealed. 93e $upreme Court o/ Mi,3i6an" 340 Mi,3. 140" %5 B.W.2d 29% and 340 Mi,3. 151" %5 B.W.2d 301" a//irmed t3e ,onvi,tions" and ,ertiorari 4as 6ranted. 93e $upreme Court" Mr. >usti,e Dla,k" 3eld t3at /a,t t3at same 5ud6e 43o 3ad sat as t3e Mi,3i6an .5ud6e&6rand 5ur-1 be/ore 43i,3 4itnesses 3ad testi/ied presided at ,ontempt 3earin6 43erein 4itnesses 4ere ad5ud6ed in ,ontempt /or t3eir ,ondu,t be/ore t3e .one&man 6rand 5ur-1 ,onstituted a violation o/ due pro,ess. Jeversed and remanded 4it3 dire,tions. ?mportan,e o/ /ederal ,onstitutional 0uestions raised in pro,eedin6s 43erein 4itnesses be/ore a Mi,3i6an .5ud6e&6rand 5ur-1 4ere ad5ud6ed in ,ontempt b- same 5ud6e 43o 3ad sat as 6rand 5ur- ,aused $upreme Court to 6rant ,ertiorari. : /air trial in a /air tribunal is a basi, re0uirement o/ due pro,ess" and re0uires an absen,e o/ a,tual bias in trial o/ ,ases. Bo man ,an be a 5ud6e in 3is o4n ,ase" and no man is permitted to tr- ,ases 43ere 3e 3as an interest in t3e out,ome.

9o per/orm its 3i63 /un,tion in t3e best 4a-" 5usti,e must satis/- t3e appearan,e o/ 5usti,e. 93at same 5ud6e 43o 3ad sat as t3e Mi,3i6an +5ud6e&6rand 5ur-2 be/ore 43i,3 4itnesses 3ad testi/ied presided at ,ontempt 3earin6 43erein 4itnesses 4ere ad5ud6ed in ,ontempt /or t3eir ,ondu,t be/ore t3e +one&man 6rand 5ur-2 ,onstituted a violation o/ due pro,ess. Mi,3i6an la4 aut3oriIes an- 5ud6e o/ its ,ourts o/ re,ord to a,t as a so&,alled .one& man 6rand 5ur-.@FB1He ,an ,ompel 4itnesses to appear be/ore 3im in se,ret to testi/about suspe,ted ,rimes. We 3ave previousl- 3eld t3at su,3 a Mi,3i6an .5ud6e&6rand 5ur-1 ,annot ,onsistentl- 4it3 t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause o/ t3e Fourteent3 :mendment summaril- ,onvi,t a 4itness o/ ,ontempt /or /134 ,ondu,t in t3e se,ret 3earin6s. 93e 0uestion no4 be/ore us is 43et3er a ,ontempt pro,eedin6 ,ondu,ted in a,,ordan,e 4it3 t3ese standards ,omplies 4it3 t3e due pro,ess re0uirement o/ an impartial tribunal 43ere t3e same 5ud6e presidin6 at t3e ,ontempt 3earin6 3ad also served as t3e .one&man 6rand 5ur-1 out o/ 43i,3 t3e ,ontempt ,3ar6es arose. 93is does not involve" o/ ,ourse" t3e lon6 eAer,ised po4er o/ ,ourts summaril- to punis3 ,ertain ,ondu,t o,,urrin6 in open ,ourt. 93e petitioners" Mur,3ison and W3ite" 4ere ,alled as 4itnesses be/ore a .one&man 5ud6e&6rand 5ur-.1 Mur,3ison" a !etroit poli,eman" 4as interro6ated at len6t3 in t3e 5ud6e@s se,ret 3earin6s 43ere 0uestions 4ere asked 3im about suspe,ted 6amblin6 in !etroit and briber- o/ poli,emen. W3ite" t3e ot3er petitioner" 4as /132 also summoned to appear as a 4itness in t3e same .one&man 6rand 5ur-1 3earin6. :sked numerous 0uestions about 6amblin6 and briber-" 3e re/used to ans4er on t3e 6round t3at 3e //622 4as entitled under Mi,3i6an la4 to 3ave ,ounsel present 4it3 3im. 93e .5ud6e&6rand 5ur-1 ,3ar6ed W3ite 4it3 ,ontempt and ordered 3im to appear and s3o4 ,ause. 93e 5ud6e 43o 3ad been t3e .6rand 5ur-1 t3en tried bot3 petitioners in open ,ourt" ,onvi,ted and senten,ed t3em /or ,ontempt. =etitioners ob5e,ted to bein6 tried /or ,ontempt b- t3is parti,ular 5ud6e /or a number o/ reasons in,ludin6F )1* Mi,3i6an la4 eApressl- provides t3at a 5ud6e ,ondu,tin6 a .one&man 6rand 5ur-1 in0uir- 4ill be dis0uali/ied /rom 3earin6 or tr-in6 an- ,ase arisin6 /rom 3is in0uir- or /rom 3earin6 an- motion to dismiss or 0uas3 an,omplaint or indi,tment 6ro4in6 out o/ it" or /rom 3earin6 an- ,3ar6e o/ ,ontempt .eA,ept alle6ed ,ontempt /or ne6le,t or re/usal to appear in response to a summons or subpoena17 )2* trial be/ore t3e 5ud6e 43o 4as at t3e same time t3e ,omplainant" indi,ter and prose,utor" ,onstituted a denial o/ t3e /air and impartial trial re0uired b- t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause o/ t3e Fourteent3 :mendment to t3e Constitution o/ t3e #nited $tates. 93e trial 5ud6e ans4ered t3e /irst ,3allen6e b- 3oldin6 t3at t3e state statute barrin6 3im /rom tr-in6 t3e ,ontempt ,ases violated t3e Mi,3i6an Constitution on t3e 6round t3at it 4ould deprive a 5ud6e o/ in3erent po4er to punis3 ,ontempt. 93is interpretation o/ t3e Mi,3i6an Constitution is bindin6 3ere. :s to t3e se,ond ,3allen6e /136 t3e trial 5ud6e 3eld t3at due pro,ess did not /orbid 3im to tr- t3e ,ontempt ,3ar6es. He also re5e,ted ot3er ,onstitutional ,ontentions made bpetitioners. 93e $tate $upreme Court sustained all t3e trial 5ud6e@s 3oldin6s and a//irmed.FB4?mportan,e o/ t3e /ederal ,onstitutional 0uestions raised ,aused us to 6rant ,ertiorari.FB5 93e vie4 4e take makes it unne,essar- /or us to ,onsider or de,ide an- o/ t3ose 0uestions eA,ept t3e due pro,ess ,3allen6e to trial b- t3e 5ud6e 43o 3ad ,ondu,ted t3e se,ret .one&man 6rand 5ur-1 pro,eedin6s.

: /air trial in a /air tribunal is a basi, re0uirement o/ due pro,ess. Fairness o/ ,ourse re0uires an absen,e o/ a,tual bias in t3e trial o/ ,ases. Dut our s-stem o/ la4 3as al4a-s endeavored to prevent even t3e probabilit- o/ un/airness. 9o t3is end no man ,an be a 5ud6e in 3is o4n ,ase and no man is permitted to tr- ,ases 43ere 3e 3as an interest in t3e out,ome. 93at interest ,annot be de/ined 4it3 pre,ision. Cir,umstan,es and relations3ips must be ,onsidered. 93is Court 3as said" 3o4ever" t3at . ver- pro,edure 43i,3 4ould o//er a possible temptation to t3e avera6e man as a 5ud6e L L L not to 3old t3e balan,e ni,e" ,lear" and true bet4een t3e $tate and t3e a,,used denies t3e latter due pro,ess o/ la4.19ume- v. $tate o/ H3io" 2'3 #.$. 510" 532" 4' $.Ct. 43'" 444" '1 L. d. '49. $u,3 a strin6ent rule ma- sometimes bar trial b- 5ud6es 43o 3ave no a,tual bias and 43o 4ould do t3eir ver- best to 4ei63 t3e s,ales o/ 5usti,e e0uall- bet4een ,ontendin6 parties. Dut to per/orm its 3i63 /un,tion in t3e best 4a- .5usti,e must satis/- t3e appearan,e o/ 5usti,e.1H//utt v. #nited $tates" 34( #.$. 11" 14" '5 $.Ct. 11" 13. &er!er v. U.S., 222 U.S. 22, 41 S.Ct. 230, 62 L.Ed. 481 %U.S.Ill., Jan 31, 1,21) ?/ >udi,ial Code" M 21" 2( #.$.C.:. M 144" ,onstrued as deprivin6 a 5ud6e a6ainst 43om an a//idavit o/ pre5udi,e is /iled o/ po4er to pass on t3e trut3 o/ t3e /a,ts alle6ed" permits su,3 a//idavits to be abusivel- used" t3e ,ourt must nevert3eless deal 4it3 it as it is eApressed" and en/or,e it a,,ordin6 to its eApressions" and it is not t3e /un,tion o/ t3e ,ourt to approve or disapprove it. #nder 2( #.$.C.:. M 144" t3e reasons and /a,ts stated in an a//idavit ,3ar6in6 a 5ud6e 4it3 bias or pre5udi,e /or t3e belie/ in su,3 bias or pre5udi,e are an essential part o/ t3e a//idavit" and must 6ive /air support to t3e ,3ar6e o/ a bent o/ mind t3at ma- prevent or impede impartialit- o/ 5ud6ment. ?n a prose,ution under t3e spiona6e :,t" 50 #.$.C.:. MM 31&42" a6ainst /ive de/endants" t3ree o/ 43om 4ere o/ Cerman or :ustrian birt3 or des,ent" an a//idavit t3at de/endants believed t3at t3e 5ud6e 3ad a personal bias and pre5udi,e a6ainst su,3 t3ree de/endants" and statin6 as t3e 6rounds /or su,3 belie/ t3at 3e 4as pre5udi,ed and biased a6ainst t3em be,ause o/ t3eir nativit-" and t3at on a spe,i/ied date 3e said in substan,e t3at" i/ an-bod- 3ad said an-t3in6 4orse about t3e Cermans t3an 3e 3ad" 3e 4ould like to kno4 it" so 3e ,ould use it" t3at one must 3ave a ver- 5udi,ial mind indeed not to be pre5udi,ed a6ainst t3e Cerman&:meri,ans in t3is ,ountr-" t3at t3eir 3earts 4ere reekin6 4it3 dislo-alt-" t3at t3is kind o/ propa6anda 3ad been spread until it 3ad a//e,ted pra,ti,all- all t3e Cermans in t3e ,ountr-" et,." 3eld su//i,ient" under 2( #.$.C.:. M 1447 t3e /a,ts and reasons stated not bein6 /rivolous or /an,i/ul" but substantial and /ormidable" and 3avin6 relations to t3e attitude o/ t3e 5ud6e@s mind to4ards de/endants. :n a//idavit o/ a 5ud6e@s bias and pre5udi,e under 2( #.$.C.:. M 144" 4as not insu//i,ient be,ause t3e remarks alle6ed as t3e reasons /or de/endants@ belie/ in su,3 pre5udi,e 4ere alle6ed on in/ormation and belie/ to 3ave been made" 43ere t3e a//idavit re/erred to a de/inite in,ident and 6ave t3e time and pla,e t3ereo/. #nder 2( #.$.C.:. M 144" providin6 t3at" 43en a part- s3all /ile an a//idavit t3at t3e 5ud6e 3as a personal bias or pre5udi,e a6ainst 3im" t3e 5ud6e s3all pro,eed no /urt3er" but anot3er 5ud6e s3all be desi6nated" and t3at su,3 a//idavit s3all state t3e /a,ts and t3e reasons /or t3e belie/ t3at su,3 bias or pre5udi,e eAists" 43en an a//idavit le6all- su//i,ient is /iled" t3e 5ud6e a6ainst 43om it is /iled ,annot pass on t3e trut3 o/ t3e matters alle6ed or preside on t3e trial. #nder 2( #.$.C.:. M 144" a 5ud6e a6ainst 43om an a//idavit o/ bias and pre5udi,e is /iled 3as a la4/ul ri63t to pass on t3e le6al su//i,ien,- o/ t3e a//idavit.

Mr. >usti,e M,N BB: delivered t3e opinion o/ t3e Court. $e,tion 21 o/ t3e >udi,ial Code )Comp. $t. M 9((* provides as /ollo4sF .W3enever a part- to an- a,tion or pro,eedin6" ,ivil or ,riminal" s3all make and /ile an a//idavit t3at t3e 5ud6e be/ore 43om t3e a,tion or pro,eedin6 is to be tried or 3eard 3as a personal bias or pre5udi,e eit3er a6ainst 3im or in /avor o/ an- opposite part- to t3e suit" su,3 5ud6e /21 s3all pro,eed no /urt3er t3erein" but anot3er 5ud6e s3all be desi6nated in t3e manner pres,ribed in t3e se,tion last pre,edin6" or ,3osen in t3e manner pres,ribed in se,tion t4ent-&t3ree" to 3ear su,3 matter. ver- su,3 a//idavit s3all state t3e /a,ts and t3e reasons /or t3e belie/ t3at su,3 bias or pre5udi,e eAists" L L L Bo part- s3all be entitled in an- ,ase to /ile more t3an one su,3 a//idavit7 and no su,3 a//idavit s3all be /iled unless a,,ompanied b- a ,erti/i,ate o/ ,ounsel o/ re,ord t3at su,3 a//idavit and appli,ation are made in 6ood /ait3. 93e same pro,eedin6s s3all be 3ad 43en t3e presidin6 5ud6e s3all /ile 4it3 t3e ,lerk o/ t3e ,ourt a ,erti/i,ate t3at 3e deems 3imsel/ unable /or an- reason to preside 4it3 absolute impartialit- in t3e pendin6 suit or a,tion.1 =etitioners ;de/endants< represent .t3at t3e- 5ointl- and severall- veril- believe t3at 3is 3onor >ud6e Nenesa4 Mountain Landis 3as a personal bias and pre5udi,e a6ainst ,ertain o/ t3e de/endants" to 4it" 8i,tor L. Der6er" William F. Nruse and :dolp3 Cermer" de/endants in t3is ,ause" and impleaded 4it3 >. Louis n6da3l and ?r4in $t. >o3n 9u,ker" de/endants in t3is ,ase. 93at t3e 6rounds /or t3e petitioners@ belie/s are t3e /ollo4in6 /a,tsF 93at said :dolp3 Cermer 4as born in =russia" a state or provin,e o/ Cerman-7 t3at 8i,tor L. Der6er 4as born in Je3ba,k" :ustria7 t3at William F. Nruse is o/ immediate Cerman eAtra,tion7 t3at said >ud6e Landis is pre5udi,ed and biased a6ainst said de/endants be,ause o/ t3eir nativit-" and in support t3ereo/ t3e de/endants alle6e" t3at" on in/ormation and belie/" on or about t3e 1st da- o/ Bovember said >ud6e Landis said in substan,eF .?/ an-bod- 3as said an-t3in6 4orse about t3e Cermans t3an ? 3ave ? 4ould like to kno4 it so ? ,an ust it.1:nd re/errin6 to a Cerman 43o 4as ,3ar6ed 4it3 statin6 t3at .Cerman- 3ad mone- and plent- o/ men and 4ait and see 43at s3e is 6oin6 to do to t3e #nited $tates"1 >ud6e Landis said in substan,eF .Hne must 3ave a ver- 5udi,ial mind" indeed" not to be pre5udi,ed a6ainst t3e Cerman&:meri,ans in t3is ,ountr-. 93eir 3earts are reekin6 4it3 dislo-alt-. 93is de/endant is t3e kind o/ a man t3at spreads t3is kind o/ propa6anda" and it 3as been spread until it 3as a//e,ted pra,ti,all- all t3e Cer /2, mans in t3is ,ountr-. 93is same kind o/ eA,use o/ t3e de/endant o//erin6 to prote,t t3e Cerman people is t3e same kind o/ eA,use o//ered b- t3e pa,i/ists in t3is ,ountr-" 43o are a6ainst t3e #nited $tates and 3ave t3e interests o/ t3e enem- at 3eart b- de/endin6 t3at t3in6 t3e- ,all t3e Naiser and 3is darlin6 people. Kou are t3e same kind o/ a man t3at ,omes over to t3is ,ountr- /rom Cerman- to 6et a4a- /rom t3e Naiser and 4ar. Kou 3ave be,ome a ,itiIen o/ t3is ,ountr- and lived 3ere as su,3" and no4 43en t3is ,ountr- is at 4ar 4it3 Cerman- -ou seek to undermine t3e ,ountr- 43i,3 6ave -ou prote,tion. Kou are o/ t3e same mind t3at pra,ti,all- all t3e Cerman&:meri,ans are in t3is ,ountr-" and -ou ,all -ourselves Cerman&:meri,ans. Kour 3earts are reekin6 4it3 dislo-alt-. ? kno4 a sa/e&blo4er" 3e is a /riend o/ mine" 43o is makin6 a 6ood soldier in Fran,e. He 4as a bank robber /or nine -ears" t3at 4as 3is business in pea,e time" and no4 3e is a 6ood soldier" and as bet4een 3im and t3is de/endant" ? pre/er t3e sa/eblo4er.1 .93ese de/endants /urt3er aver t3at t3e- 3ave at no time de/ended t3e Naiser" but on t3e ,ontrar- t3e- 3ave been opposed to an auto,ra,- in Cerman- and ever- ot3er ,ountr-7 t3at 8i,tor L. Der6er" de/endant 3erein" editor o/ t3e Mil4aukee Leader" a $o,ialist dail- paper" :dolp3 Cermer" national se,retar- o/ t3e $o,ialist part-" William F. Nruse" editor o/ t3e Koun6 $o,ialists Ma6aIine" a $o,ialist publi,ation" //232 and >. Louis n6da3l disapproved t3e entran,e o/ t3e #nited $tates into t3is 4ar.

.Kour petitioners /urt3er aver t3at t3e de/endants 9u,ker and n6da3l 4ere born in t3e #nited $tates and 4ere not born in enem- ,ountries" and are not immediate des,endants o/ persons born in enem- ,ountries" but veril- believe be,ause t3e- are impleaded 4it3 Der6er" Nruse and Cermer t3at t3e- as 4ell as Der6er" Cermer and Nruse ,annot re,eive a /air and impartial trial" and t3at t3e pre5udi,e o/ said >ud6e Landis a6ainst said /30 Der6er" Cermer and Nruse 4ould pre5udi,e t3e de/ense o/ said de/endants 9u,ker and n6da3l impleaded in t3is ,ase.1 93e a//idavit 4as a,,ompanied b- t3e ,erti/i,ate o/ $e-mour $tedman" attorne- /or de/endants" t3at t3e a//idavit and appli,ation 4ere made in 6ood /ait3. 93e 0uestions ,erti/ied are as /ollo4sF )1* ?s t3e a/oresaid a//idavit o/ pre5udi,e su//i,ient to invoke t3e operation o/ t3e a,t 43i,3 provides /or t3e /ilin6 o/ a//idavit o/ pre5udi,e o/ a 5ud6eO )2* !id said >ud6e Landis 3ave t3e la4/ul ri63t to pass upon t3e su//i,ien,- o/ t3e said a//idavit o/ 3is pre5udi,e" or upon an- 0uestion arisin6 out o/ t3e /ilin6 o/ said a//idavitO )3* #pon t3e /ilin6 o/ t3e said a//idavit o/ pre5udi,e o/ said >ud6e Landis" did t3e said 5ud6e 3ave la4/ul ri63t and po4er to preside as 5ud6e on t3e trial o/ plainti//s in error upon said indi,tmentO 93e basis o/ t3e 0uestion is se,tion 21" and t3e primar- 0uestion under it is t3e dutand po4er o/ t3e 5ud6e" 43et3er t3e /ilin6 o/ an a//idavit o/ personal bias or pre5udi,e ,ompels 3is retirement /rom t3e ,ase or 43et3er 3e ,an eAer,ise a 5ud6ment upon t3e /a,ts a//irmed and determine 3is 0uali/i,ation a6ainst t3em and t3e belie/ based upon t3emO 93ese alternatives present t3e ,ontentions in t3e ,ase. !e/endants ,ontend /or t3e /irst7 t3e #nited $tates ,ontends /or t3e se,ond. 93e assertion o/ de/endants is t3at t3e mandate o/ t3e se,tion is not sub5e,t to t3e dis,retion or 5ud6ment o/ t3e 5ud6e. 93e assertion o/ t3e #nited $tates is t3at t3e motion and its supportin6 a//idavit" like ot3er motions and t3eir supportin6 eviden,e" are submitted /or de,ision and t3e eAer,ise o/ t3e 5udi,ial 5ud6ment upon t3em. ?n ot3er 4ords" t3e a,tion o/ t3e a//idavit is not .automati,"1 to 0uote t3e $oli,itor Ceneral" but depends upon t3e substan,e and merit o/ its reasons and t3e trut3 o/ its /a,ts" and upon bot3 t3e 5ud6e 3as /31 5urisdi,tion to pass. 93e issue is t3ere/ore pre,ise" and 43ile not in broad ,ompass is pra,ti,all- o/ /irst impression as no4 presented. t3e p3ase o/ t3e se,tion presented 3ere 4as not presented. 93ere pro,eedin6s in bankrupt,- 3ad pro6ressed to a de,ree o/ ad5udi,ation" and t3e 5ud6e 43o 3ad ,ondu,ted t3em 4as ,3ar6ed b- ,ertain ,reditors 4it3 bias and pre5udi,e based on 3is rulin6s in t3e ,ase. $u,3 use o/ se,tion 21 4as disapproved. .?t 4as never intended"1 it 4as said" .to enable a dis,ontented liti6ant to oust a 5ud6e be,ause o/ adverse rulin6s made" /or su,3 rulin6s are revie4able ot3er4ise" but to prevent 3is /uture a,tion in t3e pendin6 ,ause.1:s pertinent to t3e ,omment and to t3e meanin6 o/ se,tion 21" 4e ma- sa-" t3at >ud6e C3at/ield" a6ainst 43om t3e a//idavit 4as dire,ted" said t3at 3e /elt t3at t3e intention o/ se,tion 21 4as .to ,ause a trans/er o/ t3e ,ase 4it3out re/eren,e to t3e merits o/ t3e ,3ar6e o/ bias"1 and 3e did so immediatel-" in order" as 3e said" .t3at t3e appli,ation o/ t3e ,reditors@ mi63t .be ,onsidered as speedilas possible b- su,3 5ud6e as@ mi63t .be desi6nated.1 :not3er 5ud6e 4as desi6nated and to restrain a,tion b- t3e latter and va,ate t3e orders t3at 3e 3ad made" and to ,ommand >ud6e C3at/ield to resume 5urisdi,tion" mandamus 4as sou63t. ?t 4as denied. 93e ,ase establis3es t3at t3e bias or pre5udi,e 43i,3 ,an be ur6ed a6ainst a 5ud6e must be based upon somet3in6 ot3er t3an rulin6s in t3e ,ase.

.#pon t3e makin6 and /ilin6 b- a part- o/ an a//idavit under t3e provisions o/ se,tion 21" o/ ne,essit- t3ere is imposed upon t3e 5ud6e t3e dut- o/ eAaminin6 t3e a//idavit to determine 43et3er or not it is t3e a//idavit spe,i/ied and re0uired bt3e statute and to determine its le6al su//i,ien,-. ?/ 3e /inds it to be le6allsu//i,ient t3en 3e 3as no ot3er or /urt3er dut- to per/orm t3an t3at pres,ribed in se,tion 20 o/ t3e >udi,ial Code )Comp. $t. M 9('*. He is //233 relieved /rom t3e deli,ate and tr-in6 dut- o/ de,idin6 upon t3e 0uestion o/ 3is o4n dis0uali/i,ation.1 93is ,omment sustains de/endants@ vie4 o/ se,tion 21 and marks a distin,tion bet4een determinin6 t3e le6al su//i,ien,- o/ t3e a//idavit and passin6 upon t3e trut3 o/ its statements" a distin,tion to 43i,3 4e s3all presentl- advert. .W3enever a part- to an- a,tion or pro,eedin6" ,ivil or ,riminal" s3all make and /ile an a//idavit t3at t3e 5ud6e be/ore 43om t3e a,tion or pro,eedin6 is to be tried or 3eard 3as a personal bias or pre5udi,e /33 eit3er a6ainst 3im or in /avor o/ anopposite part- to t3e suit" su,3 5ud6e s3all pro,eed no /urt3er t3erein" but anot3er 5ud6e s3all be desi6nated L L L to 3ear su,3 matter.1 93ere is no ambi6uit- in t3e de,laration and seemin6l- not3in6 upon 43i,3 ,onstru,tion ,an be eAerted&not3in6 to 0uali/- or temper its 4ords or e//e,t. ?t is ,lear in its permission and dire,tion. ?t permits an a//idavit o/ personal bias or pre5udi,e to be /iled and upon its /ilin6" i/ it be a,,ompanied b- ,erti/i,ate o/ ,ounsel" dire,ts an immediate ,essation o/ a,tion b- t3e 5ud6e 43ose bias or pre5udi,e is averred" and in 3is stead" t3e desi6nation o/ anot3er 5ud6e. :nd t3ere is purpose in t3e ,on5un,tion7 its elements are ,omplements o/ ea,3 ot3er. 93e eA,lusion o/ one 5ud6e is emp3asiIed b- t3e re0uirement o/ t3e desi6nation o/ anot3er. Dut it is said t3at t3ere is modi/i,ation o/ t3e absolutism o/ t3e 0uoted de,laration in t3e su,,eedin6 provision t3at t3e .a//idavit s3all state t3e /a,ts and reasons /or t3e belie/1 o/ t3e eAistne,e o/ t3e bias or pre5udi,e. ?t is ur6ed t3at t3e purpose o/ t3e re0uirement is to submit t3e realit- and su//i,ien,- o/ t3e /a,ts to t3e 5ud6ment o/ t3e 5ud6e and t3eir support o/ t3e averment or belie/ o/ t3e a//iant. ?t is in e//e,t ur6ed t3at t3e re0uirement ,an 3ave no ot3er purpose" t3at it is idle else" 6ivin6 an automatism to t3e a//idavit 43i,3 overrides ever-t3in6. Dut t3is is a misunderstandin6 o/ t3e re0uirement. ?t 3as ot3er and less eAtensive use as pointed out b- >ud6e Meek in Henr- v. $peer" supra.?t is a pre,aution a6ainst abuse" removes t3e averments and belie/ /rom t3e irresponsibilit- o/ unsupported opinion" and adds to t3e ,erti/i,ated o/ ,ounsel t3e supplementar- aid o/ t3e penalties atta,3ed to per5ur-. Bor do 4e t3ink t3at t3is vie4 6ives room /or /rivolous a//idavits. H/ ,ourse t3e reasons and /a,ts /or t3e belie/ t3e liti6ant entertains are an essential part o/ t3e a//idavit" and must 6ive /air support to t3e ,3ar6e o/ a bent o/ mind t3at maprevent or impedeimpartialit-/34 o/ 5ud6ment. 93e a//idavit o/ de/endants 3as t3at ,3ara,ter. 93e /a,ts and reasons it states are not /rivolous or /an,i/ul" but substantial and /ormidable" and t3e- 3ave relation to t3e attitude o/ >ud6e Landis@ mind to4ard de/endants. We ma- ,on,ede t3at se,tion i1 is not /ul/illed b- t3e assertion o/ .rumors o/ 6ossip"1 but su,3 dispara6ement ,annot be applied to t3e a//idavit in t3is ,ase. ?ts statement 3as de/inite time and pla,e and ,3ara,ter" and t3e value o/ averments on in/ormation and belie/ in t3e pro,edure o/ t3e la4 is re,o6niIed. We are o/ opinion" t3ere/ore" t3at an a//idavit upon in/ormation and belie/ satis/ies t3e se,tion and t3at upon its /ilin6" i/ it s3o4 t3e ob5e,tionable in,lination or disposition o/ t3e 5ud6e" 43i,3 4e 3ave said is an essential ,ondition" it is 3is dutto .pro,eed no /urt3er1 in t3e ,ase.

Bor is it our /un,tion to approve or disapprove it" but" 4e ma- sa-" t3at its soli,itude is t3at t3e tribunals o/ t3e /36 ,ountr- s3all not onl- be impartial in t3e ,ontroversies submitted to t3em but s3all 6ive assuran,e t3at t3e- are impartial" /ree" to use t3e 4ords o/ t3e se,tion" /rom an- .bias or pre5udi,e1 t3at mi63t disturb t3e normal ,ourse o/ impartial 5ud6ment. 400$tt v. U.S., 348 U.S. 11, 12 S.Ct. 11, ,, L.Ed. 11 %U.S.-ist.Col., 'ov 08, 1,24) Criminal ,ontempt o/ ,ourt pro,eedin6 a6ainst de/ense ,ounsel in ,riminal prose,ution. 93e #nited $tates !istri,t Court /or t3e !istri,t o/ Columbia summaril- /ound ,ounsel 6uilt- and ordered ,ommitment to ,ustod- o/ t3e #nited $tates Mars3al /or ten da-s. Counsel appealed. 93e Court o/ :ppeals /or t3e !istri,t o/ Columbia Cir,uit" 93 #.$.:pp.!.C. 14(" 20( F.2d (42" redu,ed ,ommitment to 4( 3ours and a//irmed" and t3e $upreme Court 6ranted ,ertiorari. 93e $upreme Court" Mr. >usti,e Frank/urter" 3eld t3at 43ere trial 5ud6e in ,riminal prose,ution 3ad be,ome personall- embroiled 4it3 ,ounsel t3rou63out trial" 3e s3ould 3ave invited t3e C3ie/ >ud6e o/ t3e !istri,t Court to assi6n anot3er 5ud6e to sit in 3earin6 o/ ,3ar6e a6ainst ,ounsel. Jeversed. 93e $upreme Court 3as supervisor- aut3orit- over t3e administration o/ ,riminal 5usti,e in t3e /ederal ,ourts7 and in eAer,ise o/ su,3 aut3orit- and in vie4 o/ importan,e o/ assurin6 alert sel/&restraint in t3e eAer,ise b- distri,t 5ud6es o/ summar- po4er /or punis3in6 ,ontempt" ,ertiorari 4as 6ranted to revie4 ,onvi,tion o/ de/ense ,ounsel /or ,riminal ,ontempt entered b- 5ud6e 43o 3ad presided at prose,ution in 43i,3 alle6ed mis,ondu,t o,,urred. 93e po4er entrusted to a 5ud6e to summaril- punis3 /or ,riminal ,ontempt ,ommitted in 3is presen,e is 43oll- unrelated to 3is personal sensibilities" and distri,t 5ud6es must 6uard a6ainst identi/-in6 o//ense to sel/ 4it3 obstru,tion to la4 b- not sittin6 t3emselves in 5ud6ment upon mis,ondu,t o/ ,ounsel 43ere ,ontempt ,3ar6ed is entan6led 4it3 5ud6e@s personal /eelin6 a6ainst ,ounsel. Fed.Jules Crim. =ro,. rule 42)a*" 1( #.$.C.: ?n sittin6 in 5ud6ment on alle6ed mis,ondu,t o/ la4-er in makin6 personal atta,ks a6ainst 5ud6e" 5ud6e s3ould not 3imsel/ 6ive vent to personal spleen or respond to personal 6rievan,e. Hn issue as to 43et3er trial 5ud6e s3ould 3imsel/ 3ave sat in 5ud6ment o/ ,ontempt pro,eedin6 arisin6 out o/ trial" re,ord on revie4 o/ ,onvi,tion /or ,riminal ,ontempt o/ ,ourt supported /indin6 t3at trial 5ud6e 3ad permitted 3imsel/ to be,ome personallembroiled 4it3 de/ense ,ounsel t3rou63out trial. W3ere trial 5ud6e in abortion prose,ution permitted 3imsel/ to be,ome personallembroiled 4it3 de/ense ,ounsel t3rou63out trial and made statement to 5ur- indi,atin6 3is 3ostilit- to4ard ,ounsel" trial 5ud6e" instead o/ /indin6 ,ounsel 6uilt- o/ ,riminal ,ontempt and imposin6 punis3ment" s3ould 3ave invited t3e C3ie/ >ud6e o/ t3e !istri,t Court to assi6n anot3er 5ud6e to sit in 3earin6 o/ ,3ar6e a6ainst ,ounsel. !.C.Code 1951 M 22&2017 Fed.Jules Crim.=ro,. rule 42)a*" 1( #.$.C.:. 93e /a,t t3at t3e Court o/ :ppeals redu,ed senten,e imposed b- trial 5ud6e upon ,onvi,tion /or ,riminal ,ontempt o/ ,ourt did not take ,ase out o/ s,ope o/ rule t3at 5ud6e s3ould not sit in 5ud6ment upon mis,ondu,t o/ ,ounsel 43ere ,ontempt ,3ar6ed is entan6led 4it3 5ud6e@s personal /eelin6 a6ainst ,ounsel. Fed.Jules Crim.=ro,. rule 42)a*" 1( #.$.C.:. 93is ,ase is 3ere on revie4 o/ a modi/ied a//irman,e b- t3e Court o/ :ppeals o/ an

order b- t3e !istri,t Court summaril- ,ommittin6 t3e petitioner /or ,riminal ,ontempt. /12 93e pro,eedin6 6re4 out o/ t3e trial o/ one =e,k3am /or abortion under !.C.Code 1951" s 22&201" 31 $tat. 1322. 93e petitioner 4as =e,k3am@s trial ,ounsel. :lmost /rom t3e outset" a ,las3 bet4een t3e presidin6 5ud6e and petitioner be,ame mani/est" 43i,3" it is /air to sa-" ,olored t3e ,ourse o/ t3e trial t3rou63out its 14 da-s" and 4it3 in,reasin6 personal overtones. 93e 5ud6e a6ain and a6ain admonis3ed petitioner /or 43at 3e deemed disre6ard o/ rulin6s and ot3er be3avior outside t3e allo4able limits o/ a66ressive advo,a,-" and 4arned 3im o/ t3e ,onse0uen,es b- 4a- o/ punis3ment /or ,ontempt 43i,3 su,3 ,ondu,t invited. Hn t3e ot3er 3and" t3ese inter,3an6es bet4een ,ourt and ,ounsel 4ere marked b- eApressions and revealed an attitude 43i,3 3ardlre/le,ted t3e restraints o/ ,onventional 5udi,ial demeanor. $u,3 ,3ara,teriIation o/ ne,essit- derives /rom an abidin6 impression le/t /rom a readin6 o/ t3e entire re,ord. .Jule 42. Criminal Contempt .)a* $ummar- !isposition. : ,riminal ,ontempt ma- be punis3ed summaril- i/ t3e 5ud6e ,erti/ies t3at 3e sa4 or 3eard t3e ,ondu,t ,onstitutin6 t3e ,ontempt and t3at it 4as ,ommitted in t3e a,tual presen,e o/ t3e ,ourt. 93e order o/ ,ontempt s3all re,ite t3e /a,ts and s3all be si6ned b- t3e 5ud6e and entered o/ re,ord.11( #.$.C.:. 93e Court o/ :ppeals /ound t3at /our o/ t3e 12 /indin6s ampl- supported t3e //13 ,ommitment" but redu,ed t3e punis3ment /rom 10 da-s to 4( 3ours. ?t ,on,luded t3at .t3e /13 re,ord does not support t3e penalt- imposed. :ppellant@s ,ondu,t ,annot /airl- be ,onsidered apart /rom t3at o/ t3e trial 5ud6e. a,3 respondent to 6reat provo,ation /rom t3e ot3er. 93e 5ud6e@s treatment o/ appellant" eAamples o/ 43i,3 are in,luded in an appendiA to our opinion in =e,k3am v. #nited $tates" )93* #.$.:pp.!.C. )13%" 210 F.2d %93*" and 43i,3 is t3e ,3ie/ /a,tor in leadin6 a ma5orit- o/ t3is ,ourt to ,on,lude t3at =e,k3am@s ,onvi,tion ,annot stand" leads us all to ,on,lude t3at appellant@s senten,e s3ould be redu,ed /rom 10 da-s to 4( 3ours.120( F.2d (42" (43&(44. :s indi,ated above" t3e Court o/ :ppeals reversed =e,k3am@s ,onvi,tion be,ause it /ound t3at t3e 5ud6e@s be3avior barred t3e ,ourt ./rom sustainin6 t3e 5ud6ment as t3e produ,t o/ a /air and impartial trial.1=e,k3am v. #nited $tates" 93 #.$.:pp.!.C. 13%" 210 F.2d %93" '02. ;1< ?n vie4 o/ t3is Court@s .supervisor- aut3orit- over t3e administration o/ ,riminal 5usti,e in t3e /ederal ,ourts"1M,Babb v. #nited $tates" 31( #.$. 332" 341" %3 $.Ct. %0(" %13" (' L. d. (19" and t3e importan,e o/ assurin6 alert sel/&restraint in t3e eAer,ise b- distri,t 5ud6es o/ t3e summar- po4er /or punis3in6 ,ontempt" 4e brou63t t3e ,ase 3ere. 34' #.$. 932" '4 $.Ct. %31. 93e po4er t3us entrusted to a 5ud6e is 43oll- unrelated to 3is personal sensibilities" be t3e- tender or ru66ed. Dut 5ud6es also are 3uman" and ma-" in a 3uman 4a-" 0uite un4ittin6l- identi/- o//ense to sel/ 4it3 obstru,tion to la4. :,,ordin6l-" t3is Court 3as deemed it important t3at distri,t 5ud6es 6uard a6ainst t3is eas- ,on/usion b- not sittin6 t3emselves in 5ud6ment upon mis,ondu,t o/ ,ounsel 43ere t3e ,ontempt ,3ar6ed is entan6led 4it3 t3e 5ud6e@s personal /eelin6 a6ainst t3e la4-er. ;4< H/ ,ourse personal atta,ks or innuendoes b- a la4-er a6ainst a 5ud6e" 4it3 a vie4 to provokin6 3im" onl- a66ravate 43at ma- be an obstru,tion to t3e trial. 93e vital point is t3at in sittin6 in 5ud6ment on su,3 a misbe3avin6 la4-er t3e 5ud6e s3ould not 3imsel/ 6ive vent to personal spleen or respond to a personal 6rievan,e. 93ese are subtle matters" /or t3e- ,on,ern t3e in6redients o/ 43at ,onstitutes 5usti,e. 93ere/ore" 5usti,e must satis/- t3e appearan,e o/ 5usti,e. 93e /a,t t3at t3e Court o/ :ppeals redu,ed t3e senten,e /rom 10 da-s to 4( 3ours be,ause t3e petitioner@s ,ondu,t .,annot /airl- be ,onsidered apart /rom t3at o/ t3e

trial 5ud6e"1 is ,ompellin6 proo/ t3at t3e latter /ailed /16 to represent t3e impersonal aut3orit- o/ la4. =lainl-" t3e Court o/ :ppeals t3ou63t t3at in t3e trial ,ourt@s disposition o/ t3e mis,ondu,t o/ t3e petitioner t3ere 4as an in/usion o/ personal animosit-. :nd indeed t3at ,ourt /ound t3at su,3 4as t3e /a,t on a /ull ,onsideration o/ t3e re,ord in t3e =e,k3am ,ase and /or t3at reason reversed =e,k3am@s ,onvi,tion. 93at ,ourt spoke o/ .t3e eA,essive in5e,tion o/ t3e trial 5ud6e into t3e eAamination o/ 4itnesses" 3is numerous ,omments to de/ense ,ounsel" indi,atin6 at times 3ostilit-" t3ou63 under provo,ation"1 43i,3 it ,on,luded .demonstrated a bias and la,k o/ impartialit-1.=e,k3am v. #nited $tates" supra" 210 F.2d at pa6e '02. ?t bears repeatin6 t3at t3e 43ole re,ord ampl- supports t3is ,3ara,teriIation o/ t3e trial 5ud6e b- t3e Court o/ :ppeals.FB2:nd 3is /eelin6 to4ard//12 t3e la4-er on 43om /11 3e 3ad to pass senten,e is revealed b- 3is statement to t3e 5ur- in dis,3ar6in6 t3em.FB3 FB2. For our purposes it 4ill be su//i,ient to 0uote t4o spe,i/i, instan,esF .93e CourtF Motion denied. =ro,eed. .Mr. H//uttF ? ob5e,t to Kour Honor -ellin6 at me and raisin6 -our voi,e like t3at. .93e CourtF >ust a moment. ?/ -ou sa- anot3er 4ord ? 4ill 3ave t3e Mars3al sti,k a 6a6 in -our mout3.1)J. 215.* .93e CourtF !on@t ar6ue 4it3 t3e Court. .Mr. H//uttF ? am not ar6uin6 4it3 t3e Court" Kour Honor. .93e CourtF !on@t ans4er ba,k to t3e Court" eit3er. .Mr. H//uttF H3" ? t3ou63t Kour Honor&? am merel- tr-in6 to present m- point. .93e CourtF =ro,eed 4it3 t3e neAt 0uestion. .Mr. H//uttF 93ank -ou" Kour Honor. .Kour Honor" ? ob5e,t to -our raisin6 -our voi,e like t3at and s3outin6 at me" and ? ur6e Kour Honor not to do it. .93e CourtF Well" -ou are misbe3avin6" Mr. H//utt. .Mr. H//uttF :nd ? 3ave a ri63t& .93e CourtF :nd it is m- /un,tion to 3old t3e reins ti63t and preserve order and de,orum in t3e ,ourtroom. .Mr. H//uttF Dut not to -ell at me" Kour Honor. .:nd ? submit ? am entitled" and m- dut- is to make ob5e,tions and to state /or t3e re,ord" and ? am puttin6 m- ob5e,tions on t3e re,ord. .93e CourtF Kou 3ave /or/eited -our ri63t to be treated 4it3 t3e ,ourtes- t3at t3is Court eAtends to all members o/ t3e Dar.1)J. 250.* FB3..? also realiIe t3at -ou 3ad a di//i,ult and a disa6reeable task in t3is ,ase. Kou 3ave been ,ompelled to sit t3rou63 a dis6ra,e/ul and disreputable per/orman,e on t3e part o/ a la4-er 43o is un4ort3- o/ bein6 a member o/ t3e pro/ession7 and ?" as a member o/ t3e le6al pro/ession" blus3 t3at 4e s3ould 3ave su,3 a spe,imen in our midst.1)J. 2%0.* ;'< 93e 0uestion 4it3 43i,3 4e are ,on,erned is not t3e repre3ensibilit- o/ petitioner@s ,ondu,t and t3e ,onse0uen,es 43i,3 3e s3ould su//er. Hur ,on,ern is 4it3 t3e /air administration o/ 5usti,e. 93e re,ord dis,loses not a rare /lareup" not a s3o4 o/ evanes,ent irritation&a modi,um o/ 0ui,k temper t3at must be allo4ed even 5ud6es. 93e re,ord is persuasive t3at instead o/ representin6 t3e impersonal aut3orit- o/ la4" t3e trial 5ud6e permitted 3imsel/ to be,ome personall- embroiled 4it3 t3e petitioner. 93ere 4as an intermittentl- ,ontinuous 4ran6le on an unedi/-in6 level bet4een t3e t4o. For one reason or anot3er t3e 5ud6e /ailed to impose 3is moral aut3orit- upon t3e pro,eedin6s. His be3avior pre,luded t3at atmosp3ere o/ austerit43i,3 s3ould espe,iall- dominate a ,riminal trial and 43i,3 is indispensable /or an appropriate sense o/ responsibilit- on t3e part o/ ,ourt" ,ounsel and 5ur-. $u,3 an atmosp3ere 4ill also make /or dispat,3 inso/ar as is ,onsonant 4it3 a /air trial. 93e

manner in 43i,3 t3is trial 4as ,ondu,ted doubtless ,ontributed to t3e 4aste/ulness o/ 14 trial da-s /or a ,ase o/ su,3 limited s,ope as 4as t3e =e,k3am prose,ution. ;(< We ,on,lude t3at appli,ation o/ t3e rule pronoun,ed in Cooke v. #nited $tates is ,alled /or. 93e /a,t t3at t3e Court o/ :ppeals 3ere redu,ed t3e senten,e imposed/18 b- t3e trial 5ud6e does not take t3is situation out o/ t3e moral and 5udi,ial ,onsiderations eApounded on be3al/ o/ t3e Court b- Mr. C3ie/ >usti,e 9a/t. 9o san,tion su,3 a ,ourse o/ pro,edure 4ould 6ive it en,oura6ement. ?n t3e lan6ua6e o/ t3e Cooke ,ase" 4it3 one appropriate ,3an6e" .We t3ink" t3ere/ore" t3at 43en t3is ,ase a6ain rea,3es t3e !istri,t Court" to 43i,3 it must be remanded" t3e 5ud6e 43o imposed t3e senten,e 3erein s3ould invite t3e )C3ie/* >ud6e o/ t3e )!istri,t Court* to assi6n anot3er 5ud6e to sit in t3e se,ond 3earin6 o/ t3e ,3ar6e a6ainst t3e petitioner.1$ee 2%' #.$." at pa6e 539" 45 $.Ct. at pa6e 39%. Jeversed. +ec5ha6 v. U.S., 210 7.2d 6,3, ,3 U.S.(...-.C. 136 %-.C.Cir., 'ov 1,, 1,23) !e/endant 4as ,onvi,ted o/ abortion. 93e #nited $tates !istri,t Court /or t3e !istri,t o/ Columbia" 105 F.$upp. ''5" entered 5ud6ment and de/endant appealed. 93e Court o/ :ppeals 3eld t3at t3e eA,essive in5e,tion o/ t3e trial 5ud6e into t3e eAamination o/ 4itnesses" and 5ud6e@s numerous ,omments to de/ense ,ounsel" indi,atin6 at time 3ostilit-" t3ou63 under provo,ation" demonstrated a bias and la,k o/ impartialit43i,3 ma- 4ell 3ave in/luen,ed t3e 5ur- and re0uired reversal o/ t3e ,onvi,tion. >ud6ment reversed and ,ase remanded. ?n prose,ution /or abortion" eA,essive in5e,tion o/ trial 5ud6e into eAamination o/ 4itnesses and 5ud6e@s numerous ,omments to de/ense ,ounsel" indi,atin6 at times 3ostilit-" t3ou63 under provo,ation" demonstrated a bias and la,k o/ impartialit43i,3 ma- 4ell 3ave in/luen,ed t3e 5ur- and re0uired reversal o/ ,onvi,tion. !.C.Code 1951" M 22&201. ;21< : number o/ ot3er 0uestions are presented 6enerall-. 93ese in,lude ,laims o/ de6radin6 and belittlin6 remarks dire,ted at de/ense ,ounsel b- t3e 5ud6e" restri,tions upon ,ross&eAamination" LLt3e 5ud6e@s assumption o/ t3e /un,tion o/ an advo,ate" la,k o/ impartialit-"FB13 and pre5udi,ial remarks b- t3e //142 prose,utor. :s to t3e e//e,t o/ t3ese matters on t3e /undamental /airness o/ t3e trial t3is ,ourt /inds itsel/ divided. >ud6e d6erton and >ud6e DaIelon" ,onstitutin6 a ma5orit- o/ t3e ,ourt" are ,onvin,ed t3at t3e eA,essive in5e,tion o/ t3e trial 5ud6e into t3e eAamination o/ 4itnesses" 3is numerous ,omments to de/ense ,ounsel" indi,atin6 at times 3ostilit-" t3ou63 under provo,ation" demonstrated a bias and la,k o/ impartialit- 43i,3 ma- 4ell 3ave in/luen,ed t3e 5ur-7 FB14 t3at" ,onsiderin6 t3ese matters and ot3ers"FB15 eAamples o/ 43i,3 are set /ort3 in an :ppendiA atta,3ed 3ereto" t3is ,ourt is barred /rom sustainin6 t3e 5ud6ment as t3e produ,t o/ a /air and impartial trial. 93is ne,essitates reversal. ithro8 v. Lar5in, 421 U.S. 32, ,2 S.Ct. 1426, 43 L.Ed.2d 112 %U.S. is., (.r 16, 1,12) : li,ensed p3-si,ian 43o 3ad per/ormed abortions sued members o/ t3e Wis,onsin Medi,al Aaminin6 Doard under t3e Civil Ji63ts :,t /or a de,laration t3at statutes permittin6 t3e Doard to suspend 3is li,ense 4it3out a 3earin6 4ere un,onstitutional. : 93ree& >ud6e !istri,t Court" 3%( F.$upp. '9%" 3eld t3at inso/ar as t3e statutes aut3oriIed suspension or a revo,ation 4it3out t3e intervention o/ an independent" neutral and

deta,3ed de,ision maker t3e- 4ere un,onstitutional and unen/or,eable. 93e Doard members appealed. 93e $upreme Court" Mr. >usti,e W3ite" 3eld t3at 43ere t3e !istri,t Court 3ad 6ranted a preliminar- in5un,tion to plainti// p3-si,ian to prote,t 3is ri63ts pendin6 /inal 3earin6" t3e ,ourt erred in t3en makin6 t3e de,laration o/ un,onstitutionalit- o/ t3e statute and in en5oinin6 t3e Doard /rom utiliIin6 t3e statute a6ainst an- li,ensee. Members o/ t3e $tate Doard 4ere not ,onstitutionall- pre,luded /rom t3emselves 3oldin6 an adversar- 3earin6 on t3e matter o/ possible suspension o/ li,ense on t3e basis o/ ,3ar6es evolvin6 /rom t3e Doard@s o4n investi6ation" and it 4as an abuse o/ dis,retion /or t3e distri,t ,ourt to issue a preliminar- in5un,tion. 93e /a,t t3at t3e $tate Doard 43en prevented b- in5un,tion /rom 6oin6 /or4ard 4it3 t3e ,ontested 3earin6 on t3e matter o/ possible suspension pro,eeded to make and issue /ormal /indin6s o/ /a,t and ,on,lusions o/ la4 assertin6 t3at t3ere 4as probable ,ause to believe t3at t3e p3-si,ian 3ad en6a6ed in various a,ts pro3ibited b- t3e Wis,onsin statutes did not establis3 pre5udi,e and pre5ud6ment on t3e part o/ t3e Doard. >ud6ment reversed and ,ase remanded. Hn motion /or preliminar- in5un,tion to prote,t plainti// p3-si,ian@s ri63ts pendin6 /inal 3earin6" distri,t ,ourt erred in de,larin6 un,onstitutional t3e Wis,onsin statute ,on,ernin6 suspension or revo,ation o/ p3-si,ian@s li,ense" and in en5oinin6 $tate Aaminin6 Doard /rom utiliIin6 t3e statute a6ainst an- li,ensee. W.$.:. 44(.02)1*" 44(.1'" 44(.1(" 44(.1()'*. :ssumin6 ,orre,tness o/ distri,t ,ourt@s ,onstitutional premise t3at a6en,- 43i,3 3as investi6ated possible o//enses ,annot /airl- ad5udi,ate le6al and /a,tual issues involved" ,ourt@s ,on,lusion t3at li,ensee 4ould su//er irreparable in5ur- b- 3avin6 li,ense temporaril- suspended b- su,3 a6en,- 4as not irrational and 4ould not" as su,3" be disturbed. Fed.Jules Civ.=ro,. rule %5)d*" 2( #.$.C.:. ?n p3-si,ian@s a,tion /or in5un,tive relie/ 4it3 respe,t to en/or,ement o/ Wis,onsin statute ,on,ernin6 suspension or revo,ation o/ p3-si,ian@s li,ense" distri,t ,ourt properl- de,lined to re/rain entirel- /rom de,idin6 merits o/ ,ase and /rom inter/erin6 4it3 state administrative pro,eedin6. W.$.:. 22'.0'&22'.21" 44(.02)1" 4*" 44(.1'" 44(.1(" 44(.1()1*)6*" )'*" 44(.23)1*. !istri,t ,ourt@s amended 5ud6ment /indin6 43at ,ourt said 4as ,ontained in its prior opinion" t3at li,ensee 4ould su//er irreparable in5ur- i/ statute 4ere to be applied a6ainst 3im and t3at li,ensee@s ,3allen6e to ,onstitutionalit- o/ t3e statute 3ad a likeli3ood o/ su,,ess" did not re0uire reversal as /ailin6 to in,lude in order 6rantin6 preliminar- in5un,tion t3e reasons /or its issuan,e" t3ou63 de,ision to va,ate and remand /or /uller emendation o/ /indin6s" ,on,lusions and 5ud6ment 4ould be 5usti/ied in vie4 o/ t3eir la,k o/ spe,i/i,it-. W.$.:. 44(.1()'*7 Fed.Jules Civ.=ro,. rules ')b*" 52)a*" %5)d*" 2( #.$.C.:. Je0uirement o/ t3ree&5ud6e distri,t ,ourt /or enterin6 preliminar- or permanent in5un,tion a6ainst en/or,ement o/ state statute on 6rounds o/ un,onstitutionalitin,ludes preliminar- in5un,tions a6ainst en/or,ement o/ state statutes based on a 3i63 likeli3ood o/ su,,ess o/ t3e ,onstitutional ,3allen6e. 2( #.$.C.:. MM 1253" 22(1" 22(4. =rin,iple t3at /air trial in /air tribunal is basi, re0uirement o/ due pro,ess applies to administrative a6en,ies 43i,3 ad5udi,ate as 4ell as to ,ourts" and not onl- is biased de,isionmaker ,onstitutionall- una,,eptable but even probabilit- o/ un/airness s3ould be prevented. LL:mon6 ,ases in 43i,3 eAperien,e tea,3es t3at probabilit- o/ a,tual bias on part o/

5ud6e or de,isionmaker is too 3i63 to be ,onstitutionall- tolerable are t3ose in 43i,3 ad5udi,ator 3as pe,uniar- interest in out,ome and in 43i,3 3e 3as been tar6et o/ personal abuse or ,riti,ism /rom part- be/ore 3im. 9o s3o4 t3at ,ombination o/ investi6ative and ad5udi,ative /un,tions ne,essaril,reated un,onstitutional risk o/ bias in administrative ad5udi,ation" it 4as ne,essarto over,ome presumption o/ 3onest- and inte6rit- o/ t3ose servin6 as ad5udi,ators and to ,onvin,e t3at" under realisti, appraisal o/ ps-,3olo6i,al tenden,ies and 3uman 4eakness" su,3 a risk o/ a,tual bias or pre5ud6ment 4as posed b- ,on/errin6 investi6ative and ad5udi,ative po4ers on same individual t3at pra,ti,e ,ould not be allo4ed ,onsistent 4it3 due pro,ess. Mere eAposure to eviden,e presented in nonadversar- investi6ative pro,edures 4as insu//i,ient in itsel/ to impu6n /airness o/ administrative board members at later adversar- 3earin67 4it3out s3o4in6 to ,ontrar-" state administrators 4ere assumed to be men o/ ,ons,ien,e and intelle,tual dis,ipline" ,apable o/ 5ud6in6 parti,ular ,ontrovers- /airl- on basis o/ its o4n ,ir,umstan,es. Members o/ $tate Medi,al Aaminin6 Doard 4ere not ,onstitutionall- pre,luded /rom t3emselves 3oldin6 adversar- 3earin6 on matter o/ possible suspension o/ p3-si,ian@s li,ense on basis o/ ,3ar6es evolvin6 /rom Doard@s o4n investi6ation" and it 4as abuse o/ dis,retion o/ distri,t ,ourt to issue preliminar- in5un,tion" as it 4as 0uite unlikel- t3at p3-si,ian 4ould prevail on merits. W.$.:. 22'.0'&22'.21" 44(.01 et se0." 44(.02)1" 4*" 44(.1'" 44(.1(" 44(.1()1*)6*" )'*" 44(.23)1*. 93at $tate Medi,al Aaminin6 Doard" 43en prevented b- in5un,tion /rom 6oin6 /or4ard 4it3 ,ontested 3earin6 on matter o/ possible suspension o/ p3-si,ian@s li,ense pro,eeded to make and issue /ormal /indin6s o/ /a,t and ,on,lusions o/ la4 assertin6 t3at t3ere 4as probable ,ause to believe t3at p3-si,ian 3ad en6a6ed in various a,ts pro3ibited b- Wis,onsin statutes did not establis3 pre5udi,e and pre5ud6ment on part o/ Doard. W.$.:. 22'.0'&22'.21" 44(.01 et se0." 44(.02)1" 4*" 44(.1'" 44(.1(" 44(.1()1*)6*" )'*" 44(.23)1*. ?t is not ,ontrar- to due pro,ess to allo4 5ud6es and administrators 43o 3ave 3ad t3eir initial de,isions reversed on appeal to ,on/ront and de,ide same 0uestions a se,ond time around. 5 #.$.C.:. M 554)d*. Wis,onsin statutes pro3ibit pro3ibit various a,ts o/ pro/essional mis,ondu,t bp3-si,ians and empo4er a $tate Aaminin6 Doard to 4arn and reprimand p3-si,ians" to temporaril- suspend li,enses" and to institute ,riminal a,tion or a,tion to revoke a li,ense. W3en t3e Doard noti/ied appellee li,ensed p3-si,ian t3at a ,losed investi6ative 3earin6" 43i,3 appellee and 3is attorne- ,ould attend" 4ould be 3eld to determine 43et3er appellee 3ad en6a6ed in ,ertain pros,ribed a,ts" appellee brou63t an a,tion a6ainst appellant Doard members seekin6 in5un,tive relie/ and a temporarrestrainin6 order a6ainst t3e 3earin6 on t3e 6round t3at t3e statutes 4ere un,onstitutional and t3at appellants@ a,ts 4it3 respe,t to appellee violated 3is ,onstitutional ri63ts. 93e !istri,t Court denied t3e restrainin6 order" and t3e Doard pro,eeded 4it3 t3e 3earin6" and a/ter 3earin6 testimon- noti/ied appellee t3at a .,ontested 3earin61 4ould be 3eld at 43i,3 t3e Doard 4ould determine 43et3er 3is li,ense 4ould be temporaril- suspended. 93e ,ourt t3en 6ranted appellee@s motion /or a restrainin6 order a6ainst t3e ,ontested 3earin6 on t3e 6round t3at a substantial /ederal due pro,ess 0uestion 3ad arisen. 93e Doard ,omplied 4it3 t3e order and did not pro,eed 4it3 t3e ,ontested 3earin6 but instead 3eld a /inal investi6ative session and made ./indin6s o/ /a,t1 t3at appellee 3ad en6a6ed in ,ertain pros,ribed ,ondu,t and .,on,lusions o/ la41 t3at t3ere 4as probable ,ause to believe 3e 3ad violated ,ertain ,riminal provisions. $ubse0uentl-" a t3ree&5ud6e ,ourt de,lared t3at t3e statute empo4erin6 t3e Doard temporaril- to suspend a p3-si,ian@s li,ense 4it3out /ormal

pro,eedin6s 4as un,onstitutional and preliminaril- en5oined t3e Doard /rom en/or,in6 it on t3e 6round t3at it 4ould be a denial o/ due pro,ess /or t3e board to suspend appellee@s li,ense .at its o4n ,ontested 3earin6 on ,3ar6es evolvin6 /rom its o4n investi6ation.1:/ter appellants appealed /rom t3is de,ision t3e !istri,t Court modi/ied t3e 5ud6ment so as to 4it3dra4 its de,laration o/ un,onstitutionalit- and to preliminaril- en5oin its en/or,ement a6ainst appellee onl-" statin6 t3at appellee 4ould su//er irreparable in5ur- i/ t3e /36 statute 4ere applied to 3im and t3at 3is ,3allen6e to its ,onstitutionalit- 3ad a 3i63 likeli3ood o/ su,,ess. HeldF 93e ,ombination o/ investi6ative and ad5udi,ative /un,tions does not" 4it3out more" ,onstitute a due pro,ess violation as ,reatin6 an un,onstitutional risk o/ bias. =p. 14%4&14%(. )b* Here t3e pro,esses utiliIed b- t3e Doard do not in t3emselves ,ontain an una,,eptable risk o/ bias" sin,e" alt3ou63 t3e investi6ative 3earin6 3ad been ,losed to t3e publi," appellee and 3is attorne- 4ere permitted to be present t3rou63out and in /a,t 3is attorne- did attend t3e 3earin6s and kne4 t3e /a,ts presented to t3e Doard7 moreover" no spe,i/i, /oundation 3as been presented /or suspe,tin6 t3at t3e Doard 3ad been pre5udi,ed b- its investi6ation or 4ould be disabled /rom 3earin6 and de,idin6 on t3e basis o/ t3e eviden,e to be presented at t3e ,ontested 3earin6" t3e mere eAposure to eviden,e presented in nonadversar- investi6ative pro,edures bein6 insu//i,ient in itsel/ to impu6n t3e Doard@s /airness at a later adversar- 3earin6. =. 14%(. 4. 93e /a,t t3at t3e Doard" 43en prevented /rom 6oin6 /or4ard 4it3 t3e ,ontested 3earin6" pro,eeded to issue /ormal /indin6s o/ /a,t and ,on,lusions o/ la4 t3at t3ere 4as probable ,ause to believe appellee 3ad en6a6ed in various pro3ibited a,ts" does not s3o4 pre5udi,e and pre5ud6ment" and t3e board sta-ed 4it3in a,,epted bounds o/ due pro,ess b- issuin6 su,3 /indin6s and ,on,lusions a/ter investi6ation. 93e initial ,3ar6e or determination o/ probable ,ause and t3e ultimate ad5udi,ation 3ave di//erent /31 bases and purposes" and t3e /a,t t3at t3e same a6en,- makes t3em in tandem and t3at t3e- relate to t3e same issues does not result in a pro,edural due pro,ess violation. =p. 14%(&14'0. Jeversed and remanded. :ppellee" a resident o/ Mi,3i6an and li,ensed to pra,ti,e medi,ine t3ere" obtained a Wis,onsin li,ense in :u6ust 19'1 under a re,ipro,it- a6reement bet4een Mi,3i6an and Wis,onsin 6overnin6 medi,al li,ensin6. His pra,ti,e in Wis,onsin ,onsisted o/ per/ormin6 abortions/3, at an o//i,e in Mil4aukee. Hn >une 20" 19'3" t3e Doard sent to appellee a noti,e t3at it 4ould 3old an investi6ative 3earin6 on >ul- 12" 19'3" under Wis.$tat.:nn. s 44(.1' to determine 43et3er 3e 3ad en6a6ed in ,ertain pros,ribed a,ts.FB293e 3earin6 4ould be ,losed to t3e publi," alt3ou63 appellee and 3is attorne,ould attend. 93e- 4ould not" 3o4ever" be permitted to ,ross&eAamine 4itnesses. Dased upon t3e eviden,e presented at t3e 3earin6" t3e Doard 4ould de,ide .43et3er to 4arn or reprimand i/ it /inds su,3 pra,ti,e and 43et3er to institute ,riminal a,tion or a,tion to revoke li,ense i/ probable ,ause t3ere/or eAists under ,riminal or revo,ation statutes.1:pp. 14. FB2. 93e noti,e indi,ated t3at t3e 3earin6 4ould be 3eld .to determine 43et3er t3e li,ense 3as en6a6ed in pra,ti,es t3at are inimi,al to t3e publi, 3ealt3" 43et3er 3e 3as en6a6ed in ,ondu,t unbe,omin6 a person li,ensed to pra,ti,e medi,ine" and 43et3er 3e 3as en6a6ed in ,ondu,t detrimental to t3e best interests o/ t3e publi,.1:pp. 14. Hn >ul- %" 19'3" appellee /iled 3is ,omplaint in t3is a,tion under 42 #.$.C. s 19(3 seekin6 preliminar- and permanent in5un,tive relie/ and a temporar- restrainin6 order

preventin6 t3e Doard /rom investi6atin6 3im and /rom ,ondu,tin6 t3e investi6ative 3earin6. 93e !istri,t Court denied t3e motion /or a temporar- restrainin6 order. Hn >ul- 12" 19'3" appellants moved to dismiss t3e ,omplaint. Hn t3e same da-" appellee /iled an amended ,omplaint in 43i,3 in5un,tive relie/ 4as sou63t on t3e 6round t3at Wis.$tat.:nn. ss 44(.1' and 44(.1( 4ere un,onstitutional and t3at appellants@ a,ts 4it3 respe,t to 3im violated 3is ,onstitutional ri63ts. 93e !istri,t Court a6ain denied appellee@s motion /or a temporar- restrainin6 order" //1461 but did not a,t upon appellants@ motion to dismiss. Hn >ul- 30" 19'3" appellants submitted an amended motion to dismiss. /40 93e Doard pro,eeded 4it3 its investi6ative 3earin6 on >ul- 12 and 13" 19'37 numerous 4itnesses testi/ied and appellee@s ,ounsel 4as present t3rou63out t3e pro,eedin6s. :ppellee@s ,ounsel 4as subse0uentl- in/ormed t3at appellee ,ould i/ 3e 4is3ed" appear be/ore t3e Doard to eAplain an- o/ t3e eviden,e 43i,3 3ad been presented. :pp. 3%&3'. Hn $eptember 1(" 19'3" t3e Doard sent to appellee a noti,e t3at a .,ontested 3earin6@FB3 4ould be 3eld on H,tober 4" 19'3" to determine 43et3er appellee 3ad en6a6ed in ,ertain pro3ibited a,tsFB4 and t3at based upon /41 t3e eviden,e addu,ed at t3e 3earin6 t3e Doard 4ould determine 43et3er 3is li,ense 4ould be suspended temporarilunder Wis.$tat. s 44(.1()'*. :ppellee moved /or a restrainin6 order a6ainst t3e ,ontested 3earin6. 93e !istri,t Court 6ranted t3e motion on H,tober 1" 19'3. De,ause t3e Doard 3ad moved /rom purel- investi6ative pro,eedin6s to a 3earin6 aimed at de,idin6 43et3er suspension o/ appellee@s li,ense 4as appropriate" t3e !istri,t Court ,on,luded t3at a substantial /ederal 0uestion 3ad arisen" namel-" 43et3er t3e aut3orit- 6iven to appellants bot3 .to investi6ate p3-si,ians and present ,3ar6es )and* to rule on t3ose ,3ar6es and impose punis3ment" at least to t3e eAtent o/ reprimandin6 or temporaril- suspendin61 violated appellee@s due pro,ess ri63ts. :ppellee@s motion to re0uest t3e ,onvenin6 o/ a t3ree&5ud6e ,ourt 4as also 6ranted" and appellants@ motion to dismiss 4as denied. 3%( F.$upp. '93" '95&'9% ) ! Wis.19'3*. Hn Bovember 19" 19'3" t3e t3ree&5ud6e !istri,t Court /ound )4it3 an opinion /ollo4in6 on !e,ember 21" 19'3* t3at s 44(.1()'* 4as un,onstitutional as a violation o/ due pro,ess 6uarantees and en5oined t3e Doard /rom en/or,in6 it. ?ts 3oldin6 4asF .)F*or t3e board temporaril- to suspend !r. Larkin@s li,ense at its o4n ,ontested 3earin6 on ,3ar6es evolvin6 /rom its o4n investi6ation 4ould ,onstitute a denial to 3im o/ 3is ri63ts to pro,edural due pro,ess. ?nso/ar as s 44(.1()'* aut3oriIes a pro,edure 43erein a p3-si,ian stands to lose 3is libert- or propert-" absent t3e intervention o/ an independent" neutral and deta,3ed de,ision maker" 4e ,on,luded t3at it 4as un,onstitutional and unen/or,eable.13%( F.$upp. '9%" '9' ) .!.Wis.19'3* ;1< :ppellants ,orre,tl- assert t3at t3e !istri,t Court@s initial 5ud6ment ,on/li,ted 4it3 t3is Court@s 3oldin6 in Ma-o v. Lakeland Hi63lands Cannin6 Co." 309 #.$. 310" %0 $.Ct. 51'" (4 L. d. ''4 )1940*" t3at a state statute s3ould not be de,lared un,onstitutional b- a distri,t ,ourt i/ a preliminar- in5un,tion is 6ranted a plainti// to prote,t 3is interests durin6 t3e ensuin6 liti6ation. .93e 0uestion be/ore )t3e !istri,t Court* 4as not 43et3er t3e a,t 4as ,onstitutional or un,onstitutional . . . but 4as 43et3er t3e s3o4in6 made raised serious 0uestions" under t3e /ederal Constitution . . . and dis,losed t3at en/or,ement o/ t3e a,t" pendin6 /inal 3earin6" 4ould in/li,t irreparable dama6es upon t3e ,omplainants.1?d." at 31%" %0 $.Ct." at 520.93e >anuar- 31" 19'4" 5ud6ment s3ould not 3ave de,lared s 44(.1()'* un,onstitutional and it erroneousl- en5oined t3e Doard /rom utiliIin6 t3e se,tion a6ainst an- li,ensee. 93e !istri,t Court" 3o4ever" 3as subse0uentl- modi/ied its 5ud6ment to eliminate t3e

de,laration o/ un,onstitutionalit-/44 and to en5oin appli,ation o/ t3e statute onlas a6ainst appellee.FB'$in,e appellants are no lon6er /orbidden to appl-//1463 t3e statutes to ot3er persons" t3is issue in t3e ,ase 3as been e//e,tivel- settled. :ppellants ,ontend in addition t3at appellee@s motion /or a temporarrestrainin6 order and in5un,tive relie/ did not state 4it3 parti,ularit- t3e 6rounds /or su,3 relie/ as re0uired b- Fed.Jule Civ.=ro,. ')b*" and t3at t3e motion 4ent be-ond t3e sub5e,t matter o/ t3e a,tion sin,e t3e amended ,omplaint ,3allen6ed onl- t3e ,ondu,tin6 o/ t3e eA parte investi6ative 3earin6 b- t3e Doard. Hur revie4 o/ t3e re,ord leads us to t3e ,on,lusion t3at 43atever de/i,ien,ies appellee@s motion mi63t 3ave 3ad" t3e- are insu//i,ient to re0uire reversal o/ t3e !istri,t Court de,ision 6ivin6 in5un,tive relie/. We also /ind t3at t3e motion 4as 4it3in t3e sub5e,t matter o/ t3e ,ase as de/ined b- t3e amended ,omplaint. $ee :pp. 23. :ppellants also ,ontend t3at appellee o//ered no eviden,e upon 43i,3 in5un,tive relie/ ,ould be based. 93is ,ase" 3o4ever" turns upon 0uestions o/ la4 and not upon ,ompli,ated /a,tual issues" and t3e !istri,t Court 3as /ound bot3 t3at appellee@s ,3allen6e to s 44(.1()'* 3as a 3i63 likeli3ood o/ su,,ess on t3e merits and t3at appellee 4ould be irreparabl- in5ured absent in5un,tive relie/. ?/ t3e !istri,t Court is ,orre,t in its ,onstitutional premise t3at an a6en,- 43i,3 3as investi6ated possible o//enses ,annot /airl- ad5udi,ate t3e le6al and /a,tual issues involved" t3en its ,on,lusion t3at appellee 4ould su//er irreparable in5ur- b- 3avin6 3is li,ense temporaril- suspended b- su,3 an a6en,- is not irrational" and 4e 4ill not disturb it. C/. Cibson v. Derr-3ill" 411 #.$. 5%4" 5'' n. 1%" 93 $.Ct. 1%(9" 1%9'" 3% L. d.2d 4(( )19'3* #nder 2( #.$.C. ss 22(1 and 22(4" a t3ree&5ud6e distri,t ,ourt is re0uired /or enterin6 a preliminar- or permanent in5un,tion a6ainst t3e en/or,ement o/ a state statute on t3e 6rounds o/ t3e un,onstitutionalit- o/ t3e la4. 93at re0uirement in,ludes preliminar- in5un,tions a6ainst en/or,ement o/ state statutes based on .a 3i63 likeli3ood o/ su,,ess@ o/ t3e ,onstitutional ,3allen6e to t3e statutes. $ee Dro4n v. C3ote" 411 #.$. 452" 93 $.Ct. 1'32" 3% L. d.2d 420 )19'3*7 Coldstein v. CoA" 39% #.$. 4'1" 90 $.Ct. %'1" 24 L. d.2d %%3 )19'0*7 Ma-o v. Lakeland Hi63lands Cannin6 Co." 309 #.$. 310" %0 $.Ct. 51'" (4 L. d. ''4 )1940*. and in its amended 5ud6ment t3e ,ourt asserted t3at t3ere 4as a 3i63 probabilit- t3at appellee 4ould prevail on t3e 0uestion. ?ts opinion stated t3at t3e .state medi,al eAaminin6 board )did* not 0uali/- as )an independent* de,isionmaker )and ,ould not* properl- rule 4it3 re6ard to t3e merits o/ t3e same ,3ar6es it investi6ated and" as in t3is ,ase" presented to t3e distri,t attorne-.1 ?d." at '9(. We disa6ree. Hn t3e present re,ord" it is 0uite unlikel- t3at appellee 4ould ultimatel- prevail on t3e merits o/ t3e due pro,ess issue presented to t3e !istri,t Court" and it 4as an abuse o/ dis,retion to issue t3e preliminar- in5un,tion. FB13. :/ter t3e !istri,t Court made its de,ision" t3e Doard altered its pro,edures. ?t no4 assi6ns ea,3 ne4 ,ase to one o/ t3e members /or investi6ation" and t3e remainder o/ t3e Doard 3as no ,onta,t 4it3 t3e investi6ative pro,ess. ://idavit o/ >o3n W. Jupel" M.!." $u66estion o/ Mootness or in t3e :lternative Motion to Je,onsider :ppellee@s Motion to !ismiss or ://irm '. 93at ,3an6e" desi6ned to a,,ommodate t3e Doard@s pro,edures to t3e !istri,t Court@s de,ision does not a//e,t t3is ,ase. ;%<;'< Con,ededl-" a ./air trial in a /air tribunal is a basi, re0uirement o/ due pro,ess.1?n re Mur,3ison" 349 #.$. 133" 13%" '5 $.Ct. %23" %25" 99 L. d. 942 )1955*. 93is applies to administrative a6en,ies 43i,3 ad5udi,ate as 4ell as to ,ourts. /41Cibson v. Derr-3ill" 411 #.$. 5%4" 5'9" 93 $.Ct. 1%(9" 1%9(" 3% L. d.2d 4((

)19'3*. Bot onl- is a biased de,isionmaker ,onstitutionall- una,,eptable but .our s-stem o/ la4 3as al4a-s endeavored to prevent even t3e probabilit- o/ un/airness.1?n re Mur,3ison" supra" 349 #.$." at 13%" '5 $.Ct." at %257 ,/. 9ume- v. H3io" 2'3 #.$. 510" 532" 4' $.Ct. 43'" 444" '1 L. d. '49 )192'*. ?n pursuit o/ t3is end" various situations 3ave been identi/ied in 43i,3 eAperien,e tea,3es t3at t3e probabilit- o/ a,tual bias on t3e part o/ t3e 5ud6e or de,isionmaker is too 3i63 to be ,onstitutionall- tolerable. :mon6 t3ese ,ases are t3ose in 43i,3 t3e ad5udi,ator 3as a pe,uniar- interest in t3e out,omeFB14 and in 43i,3 3e 3as been t3e tar6et o/ personal abuse or ,riti,ism /rom t3e part- be/ore 3im.FB15 FB15.9a-lor v. Ha-es" 41( #.$. 4((" 501&503" 94 $.Ct. 2%9'" 2'04&2'05" 41 L. d.2d (9' )19'4*7 Ma-berr- v. =enns-lvania" 400 #.$. 455" 91 $.Ct. 499" 2' L. d.2d 532 )19'1*7 =i,kerin6 v. Doard o/ du,ation" 391 #.$. 5%3" 5'(&5'9" n. 2" (( $.Ct. 1'31" 1'39&1'40" 20 L. d.2d (11 )19%(*. C/. #n6ar v. $ara/ite" 3'% #.$. 5'5" 5(4" (4 $.Ct. (41" (4%" 11 L. d.2d 921 )19%4*. .)9*3e /a,t t3at t3e Commission 3ad entertained su,3 vie4s as t3e result o/ its prior eA parte investi6ations did not ne,essaril- mean t3at t3e minds o/ its members 4ere irrevo,abl- ,losed on t3e sub5e,t o/ t3e respondents@ basin6 point pra,ti,es. Here" in ,ontrast to t3e Commission@s investi6ations" members o/ t3e ,ement industr- 4ere le6all- aut3oriIed parti,ipants in t3e 3earin6s. 93e- produ,ed eviden,e&volumes o/ it. 93e- 4ere /ree to point out to t3e Commission b- testimon-" b- ,ross&eAamination o/ 4itnesses" and b- ar6uments" ,onditions o/ t3e trade pra,ti,es under atta,k 43i,3 t3et3ou63t kept t3ese pra,ti,es 4it3in t3e ran6e o/ le6all- permissible business a,tivities.1?d." at '01" %( $.Ct." at (03. ?n spe,i/i, response to a due pro,ess ar6ument" t3e Court assertedF .Bo de,ision o/ t3is Court 4ould re0uire us to 3old t3at it 4ould be a violation o/ pro,edural due pro,ess /or a 5ud6e to sit in a ,ase a/ter 3e 3ad eApressed /4, an opinion as to 43et3er ,ertain t-pes o/ ,ondu,t 4ere pro3ibited b- la4. ?n /a,t" 5ud6es /re0uentl- tr- t3e same ,ase more t3an on,e and de,ide identi,al issues ea,3 time" alt3ou63 t3ese issues involve 0uestions bot3 o/ la4 and /a,t. Certainl-" t3e Federal 9rade Commission ,annot possibl- be under stron6er ,onstitutional ,ompulsions in t3is respe,t t3an a ,ourt.1?d." at '02&'03" %( $.Ct." at (04 )/ootnote omitted*. 93is Court 3as also ruled t3at a 3earin6 eAaminer 43o 3as re,ommended /indin6s o/ /a,t a/ter re5e,tin6 ,ertain eviden,e as not bein6 probative 4as not dis0uali/ied to preside at /urt3er 3earin6s t3at 4ere re0uired 43en revie4in6 ,ourts 3eld t3at t3e eviden,e 3ad been erroneousl- eA,luded. BLJD v. !onnell- Carment Co." 330 #.$. 219" 23%&23'" %' $.Ct. '5%" '%5" 91 L. d. (54 )194'*. 93e Court o/ :ppeals 3ad de,ided t3at t3e eAaminer s3ould not a6ain sit be,ause it 4ould be un/air to re0uire t3e parties to tr- .issues o/ /a,t to t3ose 43o ma- 3ave pre5ud6ed t3em . . ..1151 F.2d (54" ('0 )C:( 1945*. Dut t3is Court unanimousl- reversed" sa-in6F .Certainl- it is not t3e rule o/ 5udi,ial administration t3at" statutor- re0uirements apart . . . a 5ud6e is dis0uali/ied /rom sittin6 in a retrial be,ause 3e 4as reversed on earlier rulin6s. We /ind no 4arrant /or imposin6 upon administrative a6en,ies a sti//er rule" 43ereb- eAaminers 4ould be disentitled to sit be,ause t3e- ruled stron6l- a6ainst a part- in t3e /irst 3earin6.1330 #.$." at 23%&23'" %' $.Ct." at '%5. More re,entl- 4e 3ave sustained a6ainst due pro,ess ob5e,tion a s-stem in 43i,3 a $o,ial $e,urit- eAaminer 3as responsibilit- /or developin6 t3e /a,ts and makin6 a de,ision as to disabilit- ,laims" and observed t3at t3e ,3allen6e to t3is ,ombination o/ /un,tions .assumes too mu,3 and 4ould brin6 do4n //1466 too man- pro,edures desi6ned"/20 and 4orkin6 4ell" /or a 6overnmental stru,ture o/ 6reat and 6ro4in6 ,ompleAit-.1Ji,3ardson v. =erales" 402 #.$. 3(9" 410" 91 $.Ct. 1420" 1432" 2( L. d.2d

(42 )19'1*.FB1% /23 :ppellee relies 3eavil- on ?n re Mur,3ison" supra" in 43i,3 a state 5ud6e" empo4ered under state la4 to sit as a .one&man 6rand 5ur-1 and to ,ompel 4itnesses to testi/- be/ore 3im in se,ret about possible ,rimes" ,3ar6ed t4o su,3 4itnesses 4it3 ,riminal ,ontempt" one /or pre5ur- and t3e ot3er /or re/usin6 to ans4er ,ertain 0uestions" and t3en 3imsel/ tried and ,onvi,ted t3em. 93is Court /ound t3e pro,edure to be a denial o/ due pro,ess o/ la4 not onl- be,ause t3e 5ud6e in e//e,t be,ame part o/ t3e prose,ution and assumed an adversar- position" but also be,ause as a 5ud6e" passin6 on 6uilt or inno,en,e" 3e ver- likel- relied on .3is o4n personl kno4led6e and impression o/ 43at 3ad o,,urred in t3e 6rand 5ur- room"1 an impression t3at .,ould not be tested b- ade0uate ,ross&eAamination.1349 #.$." at 13(" '5 $.Ct." at %2%.FB19 We are o/ t3e vie4" t3ere/ore" t3at t3e !istri,t Court 4as in error 43en it entered t3e restrainin6 order a6ainst t3e Doard@s ,ontested 3earin6 and 43en it 6ranted t3e preliminar- in5un,tion based on t3e untenable vie4 t3at it 4ould be un,onstitutional /or t3e Doard to suspend appellee@s li,ense .at its o4n ,ontested 3earin6 on ,3ar6es evolvin6 /rom its o4n investi6ation . . ..1 93e ,ontested 3earin6 s3ould 3ave been permitted to pro,eed.

8iolation o/ substantive" pro,edural" /undamental ri63ts is t3e basis o/ ,rime 14t3 :mendment due pro,ess" or e0ual prote,tion Fair and impartial tribunal ;in a ,ivil pro,eedin6< #tiliIe des,ription o/ t3e ri63t to sel/ representation in ,omplaint a6ainst >ud6e Mar6aret :nderson. Find de,isional la4 in $tate or Federal /or violation o/ t3e ri63t to a /air and impartial tribunal 43ere it resulted in t3e breakdo4n o/ t3e /undamental ri63t to due pro,essF 1*/ederal 14 amendment" 2*state :rti,le 1" $e,tion '. 3* :s it relates to elements o/ ,onspira,- a6ainst ri63ts under ,olor o/ state la4. 1( #.$.C. 241" 242. and =enal Code $e,tion 1(2 $ubdivision 4

93e assi6nment o/ t3e ,ase to >ud6e Moss 3is /riend. 93e ,lose /riends3ip relations3ip and t3e dis,ussion o/ t3e matter bet4een t3is ,ourt and >ud6e Class. )6round not supported b- de,isional la4" see In Be (nited )tates* ;Would /ailure to read pleadin6s s3o4 43ims- on be3al/ o/ t3e ,ourtO< 93e dis,ussion t3at took pla,e o/ t3e matter be4een t3is ,ourt and >ud6e Moss. LL93e repeated abdi,ation o/ t3e Code o/ >udi,ial t3i,s in t3e en/or,ement o/ t3e provision o/ due pro,ess and o/ t3e en/or,ement o/ t3e dut- to tell t3e trut3 and attorne- mis,ondu,t. Ceo//re- Class" 4ill/ul mis,ondu,t due to intentional disre6ard o/ t3e la4 in rene4al motion /or ,ontempt" /or t3e de/endants /ailure to ,ompl- 4it3 t3e order o/ t3e temporar- restrainin6 order pro3ibitin6 t3e attempt to sell. 93e rulin6 order 4as un5usti/ied. 93is is s3o4n b-" /or t3e ,riminal o//ense o/ t3e/t o/ propert- b- /alse pretenses

?n or around >ul- 22" 200(" $oon C3e- stated to Ceo//re- Class t3at s3e asked 3e re,use 3imsel/" be,ause s3e 3ad /iled a ,omplaint a6ainst 3im t3e :ttorne- Ceneral o/ t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia" and 4it3 t3e !eput- :ttorneCeneral o/ t3e #nited $tates" !epartment o/ >usti,e o/ t3e operation mali,ious mort6a6e /or t3e/t o/ propert- b- /alse pretenses. ? re/er to t3e ;Jeporter1s 9rans,ript '&22&0( p. 5F line 29<)t3is is do,umented in* +Kour Honor" ? 3ave /iled a ,omplaint /or 4ill/ull mis,ondu,t" intentional disre6ard o/ t3e la4" 4it3 t3e $uperior Court o/ t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia" Central >usti,e Center" Court Jesour,es Dureau. :nd ? am ,ommuni,atin6 and a,tin6 as a 4itness on a ,omplaint 4it3 t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia" :ttorneCeneral" amon6 ot3ers. ?n addition" ? 4ould like to re0uest t3e ,ourt to state 43at details o/ its ,ommuni,ations 4it3 5udi,ial o//i,er Jobert Moss 43en t3e order to s3o4 ,ause /or t3e ,ourt to order a preliminar- in5un,tion 4as trans/erred to 5udi,ial o//i,er Jobert Moss. For t3ese reasons ? am /ilin6 4it3 t3e ,ourt a motion on t3e basis t3at ? ,annot re,eive t3e due pro,ess ri63t under t3e Constitution or La4s o/ t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia and under t3e Constitution or La4s o/ t3e #nited $tates to a /air and impartial tribunal o/ re,usal o/ t3e Court" and re0uest t3at t3e Court re,use itsel/ in t3e interest o/ t3ese /undamental ri63ts.2 Fundamental ri63t to sel/ representation 8iolation o/ t3e Canon o/ Code o/ >udi,ial Condu,t t3at is bindin6. 8iolation o/ /undamental ri63t to due pro,ess.

Ceo//re- Class repeatedl- states t3at 3e tells 3is sta// not to servi,e $oon C3e-. Ceo//re- Class repeatedl- t3reatens $oon C3e- /or eAer,isin6 t3e ri63t to sel/&representation b- tellin6 3er t3at s3e is 6oin6 to report !avid C3e- to t3e Hran6e Count- !istri,t :ttorne- blo,kin6 3er /rom eAer,isin6 t3e ri63t to sel/&representation. 93is blo,ks 3er ri63t to respond and oppose. )/undamental ri63t to due pro,ess* Je/uses to dis,ipline attorne- mis,ondu,t 4it3 43i,3 3e be,omes a4are o/. Jepeatedl- re/uses to /ollo4 t3e la4. $tates 3is opinion t3at $oon C3e- 4as ,ommitin6 per5ur-. ),itation" vans v. $uperior Court.* Called $oon C3e- a ,3arlatan in t3e 3earin6 on t3e demurrer to t3e /irst amended ,omplaint. 93en told $oon C3e- t3at s3e 3as a slim ,3an,e

LL?n Weil v. Weil )1951* 3' Cal.2d ''0 ;23% =.2d 159< must s3o4 t3at t3e ,ourt not onl- remarked t3at didn1t believe in t3e la4 but also took a,tion to not ,ompl- 4it3 it. >ud6e Class not 6oin6 to base on rule o/ la4 but on pre,on,eption t3at t3ere is no su,3 t3in6 as /raud in t3e in,eption" or a void deed. De,ause 3e doesn1t believe t3ere eAists a void deed or /raud in t3e in,eption. ?n or around >anuar- 12" 200(" at prove up 3earin6 told !avid C3e-" t3at 3e 4as 6oin6 to report 3im /or violation o/ Dusiness and =ro/essions Code" %125 ?n prove&up 3earin6 didn1t read $oon1s oral ar6ument be/ore rulin6 LLBot 6ivin6 ample opportunit- to s3o4 eviden,e. Find ,ase 43i,3 s3o4s violation o/ due pro,ess b- not 6ivin6 an ample opportunit- to s3o4 eviden,e =eople v. Le4is )200%* 39 Cal.4t3 9'0" ;4' Cal.Jptr.3d 4%'<O ;,losest analo6- so /arF Cat,3pole v. Drannon" )1995* 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 23'" 249 LLConsidered as a 43ole" t3e ,ourt@s ,omments re/le,t a predetermined disposition
to rule a6ainst appellant based on 3er status as a 4oman. )In re Marriage o' Iverson" supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 15017We66er v. We66er" supra" 33 Cal.2d at p. 15(.*<

LLHo4 ,an 5ud6e make de,ision on validit- o/ trustee sale 43ere is onlpresented as to validit-O C3e,k positive ,ases o/ Cat,3ple v. Drannon 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 23' 93e de/endant ,ites no aut3orities.

:s a 6eneral rule 5udi,ial mis,ondu,t ,laims are not preserved /or appellate revie4 i/ no ob5e,tions 4ere made on t3at 6round at trial.2 )=eople v. $turm )200%* 3' Cal.4t3 121(" 123%" 39 Cal.Jptr.3d '99" 129 =.3d 107 see also =eople v. Melton )19((* 44 Cal.3d '13" '53" 244 Cal.Jptr. (%'" '50 =.2d '41.* =eople v. $turm )200%* 3' Cal.4t3 121(" 123' ;129 =.3d 10< +93e ob5e,t o/ trial is to as,ertain t3e /a,ts and appl- t3ereto t3e appropriate rules o/ la4" in order t3at 5usti,e 4it3in t3e la4 s3all be duladministered.2 )=eople v. MendeI )1924* 193 Cal. 39" 4%" 223 =. %5.* Halu,k v. Ji,o3 le,troni,s )200'* 151 Cal.:pp.4t3 994 ;%0 Cal.Jptr.3d 542< :ppearan,e o/ bias" de,ided b- 4t3 :ppellate !istri,t W3ere ,ourt1s rulin6s su66est a +43imsi,al disre6ard2 o/ statutor- s,3eme LL=eople v. Culbrandsen )19(9* 209 Cal.:pp.3d 154'" 15%2. 25( Cal.Jptr. '5. +43imsi,al /ailure to /ollo4 rule o/ la42
+eo.le v. 9$l*randsen, 20, Cal.(...3d 1241, 1263, 228 Cal.:.tr. 12 %Cal.(... 3 -ist.,Ma3 02, 1,8,) !e/endant 4as ,onvi,ted in t3e $uperior Court" Colusa Count-" Jobert L. Crone" >." o/ bur6lar- and es,ape" and 3e appealed. 93e Court o/ :ppeal" $parks" >." 3eld t3atF )1* senten,in6 ,ourt 3ad dis,retion to run state term /or nonviolent es,ape 4it3 previousl- imposed /ederal term" re0uirin6 a ,ourt to re,ite statement o/ reasons /or makin6 senten,e ,3oi,e" and )2* senten,in6 ,ourt@s /ailure to re,ite statement o/

reasons /or makin6 de/endant@s state bur6lar- and es,ape ,onvi,tions run ,onse,utivelto prior /ederal ,onvi,tion 4as not 3armless error. ://irmed in part and remanded. $ims" >." /iled ,on,urrin6 opinion. ;10< Cri6inal La8 110 11,2

110 Criminal La4 110PP?8 Jevie4 110PP?8)#* !etermination and !isposition o/ Cause 110k1192 k. Mandate and =ro,eedin6s in Lo4er Court. Most Cited Cases $tatutor- po4er o/ appellate ,ourts to dis0uali/- senten,in6 5ud6es s3ould be used sparin6l- and onl- 43ere interests o/ 5usti,e re0uire it. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1),*. ;11< Cri6inal La8 110 11,2

110 Criminal La4 110PP?8 Jevie4 110PP?8)#* !etermination and !isposition o/ Cause 110k1192 k. Mandate and =ro,eedin6s in Lo4er Court. Most Cited Cases !is0uali/i,ation o/ senten,in6 5ud6e ma- be ne,essar- on remand 43ere senten,e o/ ori6inal 5ud6e indi,ates animus in,onsistent 4it3 5udi,ial ob5e,tivit-7 LLit ma- also be ,alled /or 43ere 5ud6e@s /ailure to /ollo4 senten,in6 rules su66ests 43imsi,al disre6ard o/ senten,in6 s,3eme t3at is in,ompatible 4it3 5udi,ious e//ort to ,ompl4it3 its ,ompleA terms" but mere senten,in6 error" 6iven ,ompleAit- o/ determinate senten,in6 s,3eme" does not 5usti/- removin6 trial 5ud6e. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1),*. ;10<;11< Civen t3is le6islative 3istor- and t3e terms o/ t3e statute itsel/" 4e ,on,lude t3at t3e statutor- po4er o/ appellate ,ourts to dis0uali/- senten,in6 5ud6es s3ould be used sparin6l- and onl- 43ere t3e interests o/ 5usti,e re0uire it. !is0uali/i,ation ma- be ne,essar- 43ere t3e senten,e o/ t3e ori6inal 5ud6e indi,ates an animus in,onsistent 4it3 5udi,ial ob5e,tivit-. ?t ma- also be ,alled /or 43ere t3e 5ud6e@s /ailure to /ollo4 t3e senten,in6 rules su66ests a 43imsi,al disre6ard o/ t3e senten,in6 s,3eme t3at is in,ompatible 4it3 a 5udi,ious e//ort to ,ompl- 4it3 its ,ompleA terms. Dut mere senten,in6 error"//82 6iven t3e ,ompleAit- o/ t3e determinate senten,in6 s,3eme"FB( does not 5usti/- removin6 t3e trial 5ud6e7 a mere /ailure to ,ompl- 4it3 its re0uirements ,annot be said to re/le,t a la,k o/ ob5e,tivitimpli,atin6 t3e interests o/ 5usti,e. Bor 4ould senten,e reversal in su,3 as ,ase be likel- to ,ause t3e senten,in6 ,ourt to lose its ob5e,tivit-. W3atever t3e /1263 stin6 o/ reversal" vindi,tive retaliation a6ainst a su,,ess/ul de/endant ,annot be presumed to be t3e 5udi,ial rea,tion. FB(. 93at s,3eme 3as been ,alled +a le6islative monstrosit-" 43i,3 is be4ilderin6 in its ,ompleAit-. $uperimposed on =enal Code se,tion 11'0 et se0. are t3e senten,in6 rules )Cal. Jules o/ Court" rule 401 et se0.* promul6ated under t3e ae6is o/ =enal Code se,tion 11'0.3. Here" t3e alread- perpleAin6 provisions o/ =enal Code se,tion 11'0 et se0. are /urt3er re/ined into a kind o/ lab-rint3ine /ormalism under 43i,3 trial 5ud6es ,are/ull- pi,k t3eir 4a- in a kind o/ ,eremonial ritual durin6 t3e senten,in6 pro,esses.2 )People v.

)utton )19(0* 113 Cal.:pp.3d 1%2" 1%4" 1%9 Cal.Jptr. %5%" /n. omitted ;Cardner" >.<.* ?t is" in t3e C3ur,3illean p3rase" +a riddle 4rapped in a m-ster- inside an eni6ma.2 :nd 4e are not una4are o/ t3e iron- t3at an opinion su,3 as t3is one" 43ile in our vie4 ,ompelled b- t3e statutor- s,3eme" does not3in6 to simpli/- t3e senten,in6 pro,edure. We turn t3en to de/endant@s ,ontentions. 93e /irst ,laim o/ sub5e,tivit-" arisin6 be,ause t3e 5ud6e@s senten,in6 de,ision dealt 4it3 de/endant@s ,3ara,ter rat3er t3an 3is a,ts" is rebutted b- t3e /a,t t3at t3e ,ourt is eApressl- en5oined b- t3e rules to take +/a,ts relatin6 to t3e de/endant2 into a,,ount. )$ee Jules 421)b*" 423)b*7 see also rule 425)b*.* Bor is t3ere an- merit to t3e se,ond ,laim t3at t3e trial ,ourt 4as una4are o/ t3e determinate senten,in6 la4 to a de6ree 4arrantin6 removal. 93e ,ourt /ait3/ull- /ollo4ed t3e stri,tures o/ t3at la4 eA,ept /or one instan,e and t3at error o,,urred in a ver- ambi6uous area o/ senten,in6 la4Qt3e appli,ation o/ rule 451. 93e t3ird and /inal ,laim" 43ile ,orre,t" does not 5usti/- removin6 t3e senten,in6 5ud6e. W3en a senten,e is ,onse,utive to a term imposed b- a ,ourt o/ t3e #nited $tates" rule 451)b* re0uires t3e trial ,ourt to +identi/- t3e ot3er 5urisdi,tion and t3e pro,eedin6s in 43i,3 t3e ot3er senten,e 4as imposed.2 Here t3e ,ourt onl- identi/ied t3e /ederal term as one imposed b- t3e +Federal Court.2 #nder t3e rule" t3e +5ud6ment s3ould be modi/ied to spe,i/- t3e /ederal ,ase to 43i,3 t3e ,ourt 4as re/errin6 and ... re/le,t t3at t3e state senten,e 4ill ,ommen,e a/ter t3e ,ompletion o/ t3e senten,e in t3e /ederal ,ase.2 )&easey% supra% 9( Cal.:pp.3d at p. '92" 159 Cal.Jptr. '55.* Dut 43atever ot3er 6rounds ma- eAist /or ,3allen6in6 t3e ob5e,tivit- o/ t3e senten,in6 5ud6e" t3is is not one o/ t3em. 93e matter is remanded /or resenten,in6 in ,on/ormit- 4it3 t3e vie4s eApressed in t3is opinion. ?n all ot3er respe,ts" t3e 5ud6ment is a//irmed. 93e interests o/ 5usti,e re0uire t3at an appellate ,ourt eAer,ise its statutor- po4er to dis0uali/- a trial 5ud6e" 43ose 5ud6ment or order 4as revie4ed" 43ere a reasonable person mi63t doubt 43et3er t3e trial 5ud6e 4as impartial" or 43ere t3e trial ,ourt@s rulin6s su66est t3e +43imsi,al disre6ard2 o/ a statutor- s,3eme. HernandeI v. $uperior Court ):pp. 2 !ist. 2003* 4 Cal.Jptr.3d ((3" 112 Cal.:pp.4t3 2(5" as modi/ied " re3earin6 denied. >ud6es 49)1*

#ernande= v. S$.erior Co$rt, 112 Cal.(...4th 282, 4 Cal.:.tr.3d 883, 03 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 8114, 2003 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 10,,,4 %Cal.(... 2 -ist., Se. 2,, 2003) ;33< J$d!es 4,%1) 22'k49)1* Most Cited Cases 93e interests o/ 5usti,e re0uire t3at an appellate ,ourt eAer,ise its statutor- po4er to dis0uali/- a trial 5ud6e" 43ose 5ud6ment or order 4as revie4ed" 43ere a reasonable person mi63t doubt 43et3er t3e trial 5ud6e 4as impartial" or 43ere t3e trial ,ourt@s rulin6s su66est t3e R43imsi,al disre6ardR o/ a statutor- s,3eme. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1),*. ,ourt.R ;32<;33< 93e po4er o/ t3e appellate ,ourt to dis0uali/- a 5ud6e under Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0.1" subdivision ),*" s3ould be eAer,ised sparin6l-" and onl- i/ t3e interests o/ 5usti,e re0uire it. )Livingston v. Marie Callenders% Inc. )1999* '2 Cal.:pp.4t3 (30" (40" (5 Cal.Jptr.2d 52(.* 93e interests o/ 5usti,e re0uire it" /or eAample" 43ere a reasonable person mi63t doubt 43et3er t3e trial 5ud6e 4as impartial )Catchpole v. Brannon %1,,2) 36 Cal.(...4th 231, 241, 42 Cal.:.tr.2d 440*" or LL43ere

t3e ,ourt@s rulin6s su66est t3e R43imsi,al disre6ardR o/ a statutor- s,3eme. )People v. "ul6randsen )19(9* 209 Cal.:pp.3d 154'" 15%2" 25( Cal.Jptr. '5.* =etitioners ,ontend t3at 5usti,e re0uires t3e assi6nment o/ a ne4 5ud6e" be,ause t3e- 3ave been R/or,edR to /ile t3ree petitions to overturn dis,over- orders re0uirin6 t3e dis,losure o/ attorne- 4ork produ,t. We observe t3at one su,3 petition" in ,ase Bo. D1%2999" 4as summaril- denied. We partiall- 6rant and den- t3e t4o orders at issue in t3is opinion. 93e trial ,ourt@s orders in ,onne,tion 4it3 t3e interro6atories and t3e dis,losure o/ eAperts and t3eir opinions do not su66est bias or 43ims- on be3al/ o/ t3e ,ourt" onl- /rustration and a desire to mana6e a ,ompleA ,ase. 93us" 4e denpetitioners@ re0uest.

?s t3e standard /or appearan,e o/ bias under C.C.=. 1'0.1 )a*)%*)C* /ound bappl-in6 t3e 5udi,ial mis,ondu,t in t3e Code o/ >udi,ial t3i,s7 in Cat,3pole v. Drannon )1995* 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 23'" 24% ;42 Cal.Jptr.2d 440< 93e ,ourt utiliIed t3e ,anons as standards to determine t3e appearan,e o/ bias and partialit-" notin6S,itin6" t3at Canon 2 ; C('4' 2. ( JU-9E S#(LL

(>4I- IM+:4+:IE?@ ('- ?#E (++E(:('CE 47 IM+:4+:IE?@ I' (LL 47 ?#E JU-9EAS (C?I>I?IES< appearan,e o/ impropriet- is an ob5e,tive test. :nd t3en statin6" +LL)5* 93e Code o/ >udi,ial Condu,t also a,kno4led6es t3at t3e absen,e o/ 5udi,ial impartialitma- be based on 6ender bias. LL93us" in order to advan,e /241 t3e pre,ept t3at +: >ud6e $3ould =er/orm t3e !uties o/ >udi,ial H//i,e ?mpartiall- and !ili6entl-2 )Cal. Code >ud. Condu,t" ,anon 3*" t3e ,ode dire,ts t3at +;a< 5ud6e s3ould not" in t3e per/orman,e o/ 5udi,ial duties" b- 4ords or ,ondu,t" mani/est bias or pre5udi,e" in,ludin6 but not limited to bias or pre5udi,e based upon ... seA ....2 )Id." ,anon 3D)5*.*2

+t3e reasons 5usti/-in6 an ob5e,tive standard set /ort3 in (nited ar! Workers are as

appli,able to t3e situation presented in t3is ,ase as to t3e issue o/ dis0uali/i,ation. )C/. ?etC v. Pankow )1995* 31 Cal.:pp.4t3 1503" 1512 ;3( Cal.Jptr.2d 10'<.* 93is is s3o4n b- t3e /a,t t3at t3e same ob5e,tive test is emplo-ed to determine 43et3er a 5ud6e 3as avoided impropriet- and t3e appearan,e t3ereo/" as mandated b- LL,anon 2 o/ t3e Cali/ornia Code o/ >udi,ial Condu,t. 93e ,ommentar- to ,anon 2 provides t3at +;t<3e test /or t3e appearan,e o/ impropriet- is 43et3er a person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts mi63t reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to a,t 4it3 inte6rit-" impartialit-" and ,ompeten,e.2 + W3ere t3e avera6e person ,ould 4ell entertain doubt 43et3er t3e trial 5ud6e 4as impartial" appellate ,ourts are not re0uired to spe,ulate 43et3er t3e bias 4as a,tual or merel- apparent" or 43et3er t3e result 4ould 3ave been t3e same i/ t3e eviden,e 3ad been impartiall- ,onsidered and t3e matter dispassionatel- de,ided )We66er v. We66er" supra" 33 Cal.2d at pp. 1%1&1%27Pratt v. Pratt" supra" 141 Cal. at p. 252*" but s3ould reverse t3e 5ud6ment and remand t3e matter to a di//erent 5ud6e /or a ne4 trial on all issues. )MM 1'0.1" subd. ),*" 1('.* FB4

tbo,ITattorne-3olIer.,om
Catch.ole v. &rannon, 36 Cal.(...4th 231, 42 Cal.:.tr.2d 440, 68 7air E6.l.+rac.Cas. %&'() 210, ,2 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 8431 %Cal.(... 1 -ist. J$n 21, 1,,2) %2) 9rial M 1%&&Condu,t o/ 9rial&&Jemarks and Condu,t o/ >ud6e&&Cender DiasFWords" =3rases" and MaAims&&+Cender Dias.2

93e p3rase +due pro,ess o/ la42 ,ontemplates t3e opportunit- to be /ull- and /airl3eard be/ore an impartial de,isionmaker. 93e presen,e o/ 5udi,ial partialit- is most perni,ious 43ere it bears dire,tl- on t3e matter to be de,ided. %3) >ud6es M 14&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias or =re5udi,e&&Hb5e,tive $tandard. Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1" subd. )a*)%*)C* )5ud6e dis0uali/ied i/ person a4are o/ /a,ts mi63t reasonabl- entertain doubt t3at 5ud6e 4ould be able to be impartial* makes t3e dis0uali/i,ation standard /undamentall- an ob5e,tive one. 93e statute represents a le6islative 5ud6ment t3at" due to t3e sensitivit- o/ t3e 0uestion and in3erent di//i,ulties o/ proo/ as 4ell as t3e importan,e o/ publi, ,on/iden,e in t3e 5udi,ial s-stem" t3e issue is not limited to t3e eAisten,e o/ an a,tual bias. LLJat3er" i/ a reasonable man or 4oman 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated. 9o ensure t3at t3e pro,eedin6s appear to t3e publi, to be impartial and 3en,e 4ort3- o/ t3eir ,on/iden,e" t3e situation must be vie4ed t3rou63 t3e e-es o/ t3e ob5e,tive person. 93e reason /or t3e ob5e,tive standard o/ proo/ is t3e di//i,ult- in s3o4in6 t3at a 5ud6e is biased unless t3e 5ud6e so admits. ?n addition" publi, per,eptions o/ 5usti,e are not /urt3ered 43en a 5ud6e 43o is reasonabl- t3ou63t to be biased in a matter 3ears t3e ,ase. %4) :ppellate Jevie4 M 1'%&&!etermination and !isposition o/ Cause&& Harmless and Jeversible rror&&=arti,ular rrors and ?rre6ularities&&Condu,t o/ Court&&Dias or =re5udi,e&&:ppli,abilit- o/ Hb5e,tive $tandard. 93e reasons 5usti/-in6 an ob5e,tive standard /or t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e are as appli,able to t3e situation presented in a ,ase 43ere reversal is sou63t on t3e 6round o/ bias as t3e- are to t3e issue o/ dis0uali/i,ation. LL93is is s3o4n b- t3e /a,t t3at t3e same ob5e,tive test is emplo-ed to determine 43et3er a 5ud6e 3as avoided impropriet- and t3e appearan,e t3ereo/" as mandated b- Cal. Code >ud. Condu,t" ,anon 2. LL93e test /or t3e appearan,e o/ impropriet- is 43et3er a person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts mi63t reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to a,t 4it3 inte6rit-" impartialit-" and ,ompeten,e. %2) :ppellate Jevie4 M 1'%&&!etermination and !isposition o/ Cause&& Harmless and Jeversible rror&&=arti,ular rrors and ?rre6ularities&&Condu,t o/ Court&&Cender Dias. Cal. Code >ud. Condu,t" ,anon 3)D*)5*" provides t3at a 5ud6e s3ould not" in t3e per/orman,e o/ 5udi,ial duties" b- 4ords or ,ondu,t" mani/est bias or pre5udi,e based on seA. :lle6ations o/ su,3 bias or pre5udi,e are parti,ularl- dis0uietin6 43ere t3erelate to /a,tual rat3er t3an le6al issues" be,ause a trial 5ud6e@s /a,tual /indin6s are 6enerall- a,,orded ,onsiderable de/eren,e" 43ereas le6al rulin6s are sub5e,t to plenar- appellate revie4. W3ere t3e avera6e person ,ould 4ell entertain doubt 43et3er t3e trial 5ud6e 4as impartial" appellate ,ourts are not re0uired to spe,ulate 43et3er t3e bias 4as a,tual or merel- apparent" or 43et3er t3e result 4ould 3ave been t3e same i/ t3e eviden,e 3ad been impartiall- ,onsidered and t3e matter dispassionatelde,ided" but s3ould reverse t3e 5ud6ment and remand t3e matter to a di//erent 5ud6e /or a ne4 trial on all issues )Code Civ. =ro,." MM 1'0.1" subd. ),*" 1('*. %1a, 1*) 9rial M 1%&&Condu,t o/ 9rial&&Jemarks and Condu,t o/ >ud6e&& Cender Dias&& mplo-ee@s :,tion /or $eAual Harassment &&=redetermined !isposition to Jule :6ainst mplo-ee Dased on Her $tatus as Woman. ?n a /ormer emplo-ee@s a,tion /or seAual 3arassment" t3e trial ,ourt erred in renderin6 5ud6ment a6ainst 3er a/ter t3e ,ourt ,reated a stron6 impression o/ 6ender bias. 93e tenor o/ t3e pro,eedin6s and impatien,e t3e 5ud6e repeatedl- eApressed ,onve-ed t3e sense t3at 3e ,onsidered seAual 3arassment ,ases a misuse o/ t3e 5udi,ial s-stem. 93is 4as illustrated b- t3e 5ud6e@s len6t3- interro6ation o/ t3e emplo-ee" 43i,3 di//ered markedl- /rom t3e treatment 3e a,,orded ot3er 4itnesses" t3e +/at3erl-2 tone 3e used to4ard 3er" 43i,3 4as eit3er ,ourtl- and patroniIin6 or 3ars3 and reprimandin6" and t3e intimidatin6 admonitions 3e made ,on,ernin6 t3e emplo-ee@s testimon-. Furt3er" t3e ,ourt@s /indin6 t3at t3e emplo-ee 4as not believable rested

on stereot-ped t3inkin6 about 4omen and mis,on,eptions o/ t3e so,ial and e,onomi, realities man- 4omen ,on/ront. Mu,3 o/ t3e ,ourt@s 0uestionin6 implied a belie/ t3at t3e emplo-ee 3ad been at /ault /or allo4in6 an assault to o,,ur be,ause s3e pla,ed 3ersel/ at risk b- a6reein6 to 6o to 3er supervisor@s 3ouse and did not more a66ressivel- resist 3is advan,es. :lso" t3e ,ourt@s treatment o/ t3e eviden,e did not appear to 3ave been even&3anded. Considered as a 43ole" t3e ,ourt@s ,omments re/le,ted a predetermined disposition to rule a6ainst t3e emplo-ee based on 3er status as a 4oman. 93us" t3ere 4as ample basis upon 43i,3 a reasonable person ,ould 3ave doubted 43et3er t3e emplo-ee re,eived a /air trial. ;$ee ' it5in, $ummar- o/ Cal. La4 )9t3 ed. 19((* Constitutional La4" M 5047 2 it5in, Cal. =ro,edure )3d ed. 19(5* Courts" MM 59" 9%.< 93is ,ase presents t3e unusual 0uestion 43et3er t3e alle6ed 6ender bias o/ t3e trial 5ud6e re0uires us to set aside 3is 5ud6ment. :ppellant" Marie Cat,3pole" ,ommen,ed t3is liti6ation in t3e $uperior Court o/ Humboldt Count-" assertin6 ,laims o/ seAual 3arassment" assault and batter-" and intentional and ne6li6ent in/li,tion o/ emotional distress a6ainst respondents" Melod- and >a- Jane" o4ners o/ ureka Dur6er Nin6 ) DN*" 43ere appellant 3ad been emplo-ed7 J&5 nterprises )doin6 business as ureka Dur6er Nin6*" t3e Janes@ ,orporation7 Nent Creen3al63" a mana6er at DN7 and Jud- Drannon" a /ormer assistant mana6er at DN and 3is 4i/e" Lorraine Drannon. >ud6ment a6ainst appellant 4as rendered b- a superior ,ourt 5ud6e sittin6 4it3out a 5ur-. :ppellant ,ontends t3e 5ud6ment must be reversed not onl- be,ause o/ t3e 6ender bias o/ t3e trial 5ud6e" but due to t3e absen,e o/ substantial eviden,e to support t3e ,ourt@s /indin6s t3at s3e 4as not seAuall- 3arassed b- bein6 sub5e,t to a 3ostile 4ork environment" t3at s3e 4as not retaliated a6ainst a/ter reportin6 Drannon@s assault" and t3at t3e o4ners o/ DN are not liable /or t3e 3arassment s3e su//ered. :ppellant also ,3allen6es t3e /indin6 t3at s3e su//ered no dama6es as a result o/ respondents@ ,ondu,t. ?t is unne,essar- /or us to in0uire into t3e su//i,ien,- o/ t3e eviden,e to support t3e /indin6s be,ause 4e ,on,lude t3at t3e alle6ations o/ 5udi,ial 6ender bias are meritorious and reverse on t3at basis. /242 De/ore ,on/rontin6 t3e alle6ations o/ 6ender bias 4e must address respondents@ ,ontention t3at appellant 3ad a dut- to ob5e,t or to raise t3at issue in some ot3er appropriate /as3ion in t3e trial ,ourt and 4aived t3e ,laim b- not doin6 so. )1* We are a4are o/ no su,3 obli6ation. Fe4 more dauntin6 responsibilities ,ould be imposed on ,ounsel t3an t3e dut- to ,on/ront a 5ud6e 4it3 3is or 3er alle6ed 6ender bias in presidin6 at trial. 93e risk o/ o//endin6 t3e ,ourt and t3e doubt 43et3er t3e problem ,ould be ,ured b- ob5e,tion mi63t dis,oura6e t3e assertion o/ even meritorious ,laims. Je0uirin6 t3e issue to be raised at trial 4ould t3ere/ore 3ave t3e un5ust e//e,t o/ insulatin6 5ud6es /rom a,,ountabilit- /or bias. )C/. People v. McAlister )19(5* 1%' Cal.:pp.3d %33" %44 ;213 Cal.Jptr. 2'1<.* We do not mean to su66est" o/ ,ourse" t3at trial ,ounsel are not /ree to ob5e,t to 5udi,ial statements or ,ondu,t on t3e basis o/ alle6ed 6ender bias" 43i,3 in some instan,es ma- be t3e better ,ourse. We 3old simpl- t3at t3e issue ma- be raised on appeal re6ardless 43et3er ob5e,tion 4as made belo4. :s Witkin 3as observed" t3e rule t3at an appellate ,ourt 4ill not ,onsider points not raised at trial does not appl- to +;a< matter involvin6 t3e publi, interest or LLt3e due administration o/ 5usti,e.2 )9 Witkin" Cal. =ro,edure )3d ed. 19(5* :ppeal" M 315" p. 32%.* 93e issue o/ 5udi,ial 6ender bias obviousl- involves 6oth a publi, interest and t3e due administration o/ 5usti,e. Jespondents@ relian,e on Bios v. Chand )1955* 130 Cal.:pp.2d (33 ;2(0 =.2d 4'< is mispla,ed" as t3at ,ase does not 3old t3at t3e issue o/ 5udi,ial bias must be raised at trial. 93e ,ourt simpl- /ound t3at" in t3e ,ir,umstan,es o/ t3at ,ase" t3e /ailure

to raise t3e issue belo4 4as an indi,ation t3at t3e appellant@s eAperien,ed trial ,ounsel did not ,onsider appellant to 3ave been pre5udi,ed b- t3e trial ,ourt@s 0uestionable remarks. )Id. at pp. (40&(41.*/242 :ppellant@s /ailure to raise t3e issue o/ 6ender bias at trial 3ere does not pre,lude our addressin6 it no4. ?ndeed" one ,ourt 3as vindi,ated a ,laim o/ 5udi,ial bias raised /or t3e /irst time durin6 oral ar6ument on appeal. )In re Marriage o' Iverson )1992* 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 1495" 1504 ;15 Cal.Jptr.2d '0< ),on,. opn. o/ Moore" >.*.* ???. )2* LLW3atever disa6reement t3ere ma- be in our 5urispruden,e as to t3e s,ope o/ t3e p3rase +due pro,ess o/ la4"2 t3ere is no dispute t3at it minimall- ,ontemplates t3e opportunit- to be /ull- and /airl- 3eard be/ore an impartial de,isionmaker. 93e presen,e o/ 5udi,ial partialit- is" o/ ,ourse" most perni,ious 43ere&as ,laimed 3ere& it bears dire,tl- on t3e matter to be de,ided. Jeversal 3as t3ere/ore been re0uired in ,ases alle6in6 6ender bias FB2 43ere it is +reasonabl- ,lear t3at ;t3e trial 5ud6e< entertained pre,on,eptions about t3e parties be,ause o/ t3eir 6ender ... ;43i,3 make< it impossible /or ;a part-< to re,eive a /air trial.2 )In re Marriage o' Iverson" supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 1499.* FB2 For purposes o/ t3is opinion" 4e a,,ept t3e de/inition o/ +6ender bias2 developed b- t3e >udi,ial Coun,il :dvisor- Committee on Cender Dias in t3e Courts" 43i,3 provides t3at +6ender bias in,ludes be3avior or de,ision makin6 o/ parti,ipants in t3e 5usti,e s-stem 43i,3 is based on or reveals )1* stereot-pi,al attitudes about t3e nature and roles o/ 4omen and men7 )2* ,ultural per,eptions o/ t3eir relative 4ort37 and )3* m-t3s and mis,on,eptions about t3e so,ial and e,onomi, realities en,ountered b- bot3 seAes.2 )>udi,ial Coun,il o/ Cal. :,3ievin6 0ual >usti,e /or Women and Men in t3e CourtsF 93e !ra/t Jep. o/ t3e >udi,ial Coun,il :dvisor- Committee on Cender Dias in t3e Courts )1990* at p. 2 ;3erea/ter !ra/t Jeport o/ t3e >udi,ial Coun,il<.* 93is report 4as a,,epted on Bovember 1%" 1990" b- t3e >udi,ial Coun,il" 43i,3 unanimousl- adopted its re,ommendation. 93e /inal report" 43i,3 4ill be substantiall- identi,al to t3e !ra/t Jeport" 4ill be publis3ed s3ortl- b- t3e >udi,ial Coun,il $tandin6 Committee on :,,ess and Fairness. :ssertin6 t3at reversal is mandated not onl- 43ere a,tual bias is /ound" but also 43ere t3e 5ud6e@s a,tions 6ive rise to t3e appearan,e o/ bias" appellant relies on t3e venerable prin,iple t3at + @;t<3e trial o/ a ,ase s3ould not onl- be /air in /a,t" but it s3ould also appear to be /air. :nd 43ere t3e ,ontrar- appears" it s3o,ks t3e 5udi,ial instin,t to allo4 t3e 5ud6ment to stand.@ 2 )We66er v. We66er )194(* 33 Cal.2d 153" 155 ;199 =.2d 934<" 0uotin6 Pratt v. Pratt )1903* 141 Cal. 24'" 252 ;'4 =. '42<.* Jespondents" on t3e ot3er 3and" ar6ue t3at a,tual bias must be s3o4n be/ore a 5ud6ment ,an be reversed" ,itin6 )hakin v. ?oard o' Medical E:a!iners )19%'* 254 Cal.:pp.2d 102" 11' ;%2 Cal.Jptr. 2'4" 23 :.L.J.3d 139(<" /or t3e proposition t3at +;b<ias and pre5udi,e are never implied and must be establis3ed b- ,lear averments.2 )hakin 4as de,ided under t3e prior statute 6overnin6 5udi,ial dis0uali/i,ation&Code o/ Civil =ro,edure /ormer /246 se,tion 1'0" subdivision )a*)5* FB3 &43i,3 3ad been ,onstrued to re0uire a s3o4in6 o/ bias in /a,t. )$ee Andrews v. Agricultural La6or Belations ?d. )19(1* 2( Cal.3d '(1" '92&'93 ;1'1 Cal.Jptr. 590" %23 =.2d 151<.* 93at statute 4as" 3o4ever" repla,ed b- se,tion 1'0.1" subdivision )a*)%*)C* in 19(4. LL)3* 93e ne4 statute altered t3e re0uirement b- makin6 t3e dis0uali/i,ation standard + @/undamentall- an ob5e,tive one. ?t represents a le6islative 5ud6ment t3at due to t3e sensitivit- o/ t3e 0uestion and in3erent di//i,ulties o/ proo/ as 4ell as t3e importan,e o/ publi, ,on/iden,e in t3e 5udi,ial s-stem" t3e issue is not limited to t3e eAisten,e o/ an a,tual bias. Jat3er" i/ a reasonable man ;or 4oman< 4ould

entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated. 29o ensure t3at t3e pro,eedin6s appear to t3e publi, to be impartial and 3en,e 4ort3o/ t3eir ,on/iden,e" t3e situation must be vie4ed t3rou63 t3e e-es o/ t3e ob5e,tive person.+ ;Citation.<.@ 2 )In re Marriage o' Iverson" supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 1505 ),on,. opn. o/ Moore" >.*" 0uotin6 (nited ar! Workers o' A!erica v. )uperior Court )19(5* 1'0 Cal.:pp.3d 9'" 104&105 ;21% Cal.Jptr. 4<7 see also @ag!an v. Bepu6lic Ins. )9t3 Cir. 1993* 9(' F.2d %22" %2% ;under /ederal statutes +re,usal is appropriate 43ere @a reasonable person 4it3 kno4led6e o/ all t3e /a,ts 4ould ,on,lude t3at t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit- mi63t reasonabl- be 0uestioned.@ ;Citations.<2<.* +93e reason 6iven /or t3e ,3an6e ;in t3e statute< is t3e di//i,ult- in s3o4in6 t3at a 5ud6e is biased unless t3e 5ud6e so admits. ?n addition" publi, per,eptions o/ 5usti,e are not /urt3ered 43en a 5ud6e 43o is reasonabl- t3ou63t to be biased in a matter 3ears t3e ,ase.2 )(nited ar! Workers o' A!erica v. )uperior Court" supra" 1'0 Cal.:pp.3d at p. 103.* FB3 #nless ot3er4ise indi,ated" all /urt3er statutor- re/eren,es are to t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. )4* :lt3ou63 t3e ,ase be/ore us does not present t3e 0uestion o/ dis0uali/i,ation" t3e dis0uali/i,ation ,ases and statutes are nonet3eless apposite. :s t3e ,on,urrin6 opinion in Iverson makes ,lear" t3e reasons 5usti/-in6 an ob5e,tive standard set /ort3 in (nited ar! Workers are as appli,able to t3e situation presented in t3is ,ase as to t3e issue o/ dis0uali/i,ation. )C/. ?etC v. Pankow )1995* 31 Cal.:pp.4t3 1503" 1512 ;3( Cal.Jptr.2d 10'<.* 93is is s3o4n b- t3e /a,t t3at t3e same ob5e,tive test is emplo-ed to determine 43et3er a 5ud6e 3as avoided impropriet- and t3e appearan,e t3ereo/" as mandated b- LL,anon 2 o/ t3e Cali/ornia Code o/ >udi,ial Condu,t. 93e ,ommentar- to ,anon 2 provides t3at +;t<3e test /or t3e appearan,e o/ impropriet- is 43et3er a person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts mi63t reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to a,t 4it3 inte6rit-" impartialit-" and ,ompeten,e.2 LL)5* 93e Code o/ >udi,ial Condu,t also a,kno4led6es t3at t3e absen,e o/ 5udi,ial impartialit- ma- be based on 6ender bias. LL93us" in order to advan,e /241 t3e pre,ept t3at +: >ud6e $3ould =er/orm t3e !uties o/ >udi,ial H//i,e ?mpartiall- and !ili6entl-2 )Cal. Code >ud. Condu,t" ,anon 3*" t3e ,ode dire,ts t3at +;a< 5ud6e s3ould not" in t3e per/orman,e o/ 5udi,ial duties" b- 4ords or ,ondu,t" mani/est bias or pre5udi,e" in,ludin6 but not limited to bias or pre5udi,e based upon ... seA ....2 )Id." ,anon 3D)5*.* ?t bears notin6 t3at alle6ations o/ su,3 bias or pre5udi,e are parti,ularl- dis0uietin6 43ere" as in t3is ,ase" t3e- relate to /a,tual rat3er t3an le6al issues" be,ause +... a trial 5ud6e@s /a,tual /indin6s are 6enerall- a,,orded ,onsiderable de/eren,e 43ereas le6al rulin6s are sub5e,t to plenar- appellate revie4.2 )(nited ar! Workers o' A!erica v. )uperior Court" supra" 1'0 Cal.:pp.3d at pp. 104&105" ,itin6 )tate o' Idaho v. ree!an )!.?da3o 19(1* 50' F.$upp. '0%" '2( and *urtado v. )tatewide *o!e Loan Co. )19(5* 1%' Cal.:pp.3d 1019" 1023&1025 ;213 Cal.Jptr. '12<.* LLW3ere t3e avera6e person ,ould 4ell entertain doubt 43et3er t3e trial 5ud6e 4as impartial" appellate ,ourts are not re0uired to spe,ulate 43et3er t3e bias 4as a,tual or merel- apparent" or 43et3er t3e result 4ould 3ave been t3e same i/ t3e eviden,e 3ad been impartiall- ,onsidered and t3e matter dispassionatel- de,ided )We66er v. We66er" supra" 33 Cal.2d at pp. 1%1&1%27Pratt v. Pratt" supra" 141 Cal. at p. 252*" but s3ould reverse t3e 5ud6ment and remand t3e matter to a di//erent 5ud6e /or a ne4 trial on all issues. )MM 1'0.1" subd. ),*" 1('.* FB4 In re Marriage o' Iverson" supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at pa6es 1499" 1502" LL43i,3 3eld t3at t3e trial 5ud6e@s 6ender&based pre,on,eptions deprived t3e /emale liti6ant o/ a /air trial in a marital dissolution ,ase" is instru,tive as to t3e manner in 43i,3 6ender bias ma- be s3o4n and t3e nature o/ t3e s3o4in6 t3at 4ill 4arrant reversal.

?n /indin6 a6ainst t3e 4i/e on several issues" in,ludin6 t3e validit- o/ a premarital a6reement and t3e determination as to 43i,3 part- 3ad initiated t3e marria6e" t3e trial 5ud6e in Iverson remarked t3at t3e 4i/e" 43om 3e /248 re/erred to as a +lovel6irl"2 3ad +not3in6 6oin6 /or 3er eA,ept /or 3er p3-si,al attra,tiveness.2 )In re Marriage o' Iverson" supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 149(.* +His reasonin6 appears to 3ave been t3at @lovel-@ 4omen are t3e ones 43o ask 4ealt3- men 43o do not look like @:donis@ to marr-" and t3ere/ore ;t3e 4i/e< 4as not ,redible 43en s3e testi/ied ;t3at t3e 3usband< asked 3er to marr- 3im.2 )Id. at p. 1500.*Je/errin6 to t3e /a,t t3at t3e ,ouple 4as livin6 to6et3er be/ore t3eir marria6e" t3e 5ud6e ,ommented" +:nd 43-" in 3eaven@s name" do -ou bu- t3e ,o4 43en -ou 6et t3e milk /ree ....2 )Id. at p. 1499.* LLDased on t3ese ,omments" t3e ,ourt o/ appeal /ound t3e trial 5ud6e 3ad not onlused lan6ua6e indi,atin6 6ender bias" but also rendered 5ud6ment on t3e basis o/ 6ender&based stereot-pes. )In re Marriage o' Iverson" supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 1500.* LL93e ,ourt ,on,luded t3at t3e 5ud6e s3o4ed a +predetermined disposition2 to rule a6ainst t3e 4i/e based on 3er status as a 4oman. ) Id. at p. 1501" ,itin6 We66er v. We66er" supra" 33 Cal.2d at p. 15(.* 93e 5ud6ment 4as reversed and t3e matter remanded /or a ne4 trial be/ore a di//erent 5ud6e. )11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 1503.* ?n a separate ,on,urrin6 opinion" >usti,e Moore disa6reed t3at t3e trial 5ud6e@s ,omments" read in ,onteAt" establis3ed a,tual bias" but rea,3ed t3e same result" ,on,ludin6 t3at +;i<t matters not 43et3er t3ere 4as a,tual bias" appearan,e o/ bias bein6 su//i,ient to 4arrant reversal.2 )In re Marriage o' Iverson" supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 1503 ),on,. opn. o/ Moore" >.*.* )'a* :ppellant@s ,laim o/ 6ender bias rests on t3e related ,ontentions t3at t3e trial 5ud6e displa-ed a belie/ t3at seAual 3arassment ,ases are relativel- unimportant and invoked seAual stereot-pes in evaluatin6 appellant@s be3avior and ,redibilit-. 93ere is" un/ortunatel-" substan,e to t3ese ,laims. LL94o /a,tors ,reate t3e stron6 impression o/ 6ender bias. 93e /irst is t3e tenor o/ t3e pro,eedin6s and impatien,e t3e trial 5ud6e repeatedl- eApressed" 43i,3 ,onve-ed t3e sense 3e ,onsidered seAual 3arassment ,ases +detrimental to ever-one ,on,erned2 and a misuse o/ t3e 5udi,ial s-stem. 93e se,ond /a,tor relates to t3e assessment o/ appellant@s ,redibilit-. 93e ,ourt@s /indin6 t3at appellant 4as not believable" t3e primar- 5usti/i,ation provided /or t3e 5ud6ment a6ainst 3er" rests on stereot-ped t3inkin6 about 4omen and mis,on,eptions o/ t3e so,ial and e,onomi, realities man- 4omen ,on/ront. LLConsidered as a 43ole" t3e ,ourt@s ,omments re/le,t a predetermined disposition to rule a6ainst appellant based on 3er status as a 4oman. )In re Marriage o' Iverson" supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 15017We66er v. We66er" supra" 33 Cal.2d at p. 15(.* 93e 5ud6e@s eApressed 3ostilit- to seAual 3arassment ,ases and t3e stereot-pi,al attitudes and mis,on,eptions 3e adopted provide a reasonable person ample basis upon 43i,3 to doubt 43et3er appellant re,eived a /air trial. :. We ,annot set /ort3 all t3e ,omments made over t3e ,ourse o/ t3e ei63tda- trial t3at ,olle,tivel- ,reate t3e impression o/ 5udi,ial 6ender bias and ,ast doubt on t3e ,ourt@s impartialit-. Hne o/ t3e best illustrations o/ t3e trial 5ud6e@s relian,e on 6ender&based pre,on,eptions 4as provided earl- on" a/ter respondents ,ompleted t3eir ,ross&eAamination o/ appellant" 43o 4as t3e /irst 4itness. 93e trial 5ud6e@s len6t3interro6ation o/ 3er di//ered markedl- /rom t3e treatment 3e a,,orded ot3ers 43o testi/ied" most o/ 43om" in,ludin6 respondent Drannon" 4ere asked no 0uestions. 93e ,ourt@s initial 0uestions set t3e tone /or 43at 4as to /ollo4F

e**er v. e**er, 33 Cal.2d 123, 1,, +.2d ,34 %Cal., -ec 03, 1,48) H :!BH9 $ %1) :ppeal and rror M 1453&&Harmless and Jeversible rror. W3et3er or not an error ,omplained o/ 3as produ,ed substantial in5ur- to appellant is a proper 0uestion /or ,onsideration on appeal. %2) 9rial M 22&&Fairness. 93e trial o/ a ,ase s3ould not onl- be /air in /a,t" but it s3ould also appear to be /air. %3) !ivor,e M 21'&&=ermanent :limon-&&:ppeal&&Harmless and Jeversible rror. LL?n a 4i/e@s a,tion /or divor,e" t3e trial 5ud6e@s premature ,omment a6ainst an alimon- a4ard" a/ter 3earin6 onl- t3e 3usband@s testimon- on t3e issue o/ abilit- to pa-" LLand 3is subse0uent de,larations t3at t3e 4i/e@s testimon- as to ne,essareApenses 4as a +4aste o/ time"2 pre,luded 3er /rom 3avin6 a /air trial and re0uired reversal o/ an interlo,utor- de,ree 43i,3 denied 3er support and maintenan,e" 43ere s3e 4as 53 -ears o/ a6e" 3ad been married to de/endant /or 3' -ears" 3ad borne 3im ei63t ,3ildren" 3ad no propert- or sour,e o/ in,ome ot3er t3an 3is provision /or 3er" and 3ad no trainin6 or edu,ation 43i,3 4ould e0uip 3er to earn a liveli3ood" and 43ere t3e ,ommunit- propert- sub5e,t to division 4as o/ nominal value. %4) 9rial M 25&&Jemarks and Condu,t o/ >ud6e&&=re5ud6in6 Case. LL: trial 5ud6e s3ould not pre5ud6e t3e issues" but s3ould keep an open mind until all o/ t3e eviden,e is presented to 3im. $ee 24 Cal.J$r. '347 53 (6.J$r. '5. %2) !ivor,e M 20'&&=ermanent :limon-&&Cir,umstan,es to be Considered. Bot onl- t3e 3usband@s a,tual earnin6s" but also 3is abilit- to earn mone- b- t3e use o/ reasonable e//ort 4ill a//e,t t3e propriet- o/ an alimon- a4ard. $ee 1 Cal.J$r. 10217 1' (6.J$r. 405. %8) !ivor,e M 20%&&=ermanent :limon-&&!is,retion o/ Court. LLW3ile t3e 6rantin6 and re/usin6 o/ alimon- in a,tions /or divor,e lies lar6el- in t3e dis,retion o/ t3e trial ,ourt" su,3 dis,retion must be a 5udi,ious one based on all t3e /a,ts and ,ir,umstan,es o/ t3e ,ase" LLand it is an abuse o/ dis,retion to den- alimon- 43ere t3e 4i/e@s presentation o/ eviden,e as to 3er need /or a suitable support allo4an,e be,ame meanin6less in t3e /a,e o/ t3e trial 5ud6e@s pre5ud6ment o/ t3at issue a6ainst 3er" t3ereb- in e//e,t deprivin6 3er o/ 3er da- in ,ourt. %,) !ivor,e M 195)3*&&Counsel Fees&&:ppeal&&Harmless and Jeversible rror. LL?n a 4i/e@s a,tion /or divor,e" an interlo,utor- de,ree den-in6 /urt3er attorne-@s /ees /or plainti//@s ,ounsel as ,ontemplated b- a stipulation t3at +t3e balan,e o/ attorne-@s /ees 4as to be /iAed at t3e time o/ trial"2 and b- Civ. Code" M 13'" LL4as reversed 43ere t3e dominatin6 /a,tor 4as t3e trial 5ud6e@s bias and pre5udi,e to allo4in6 plainti// su,3 /inan,ial relie/ re6ardless o/ an- s3o4in6 o/ need t3ere/or" LLand 3is ,onse0uent /ailure to determine su,3 issues in t3e eAer,ise o/ a 5udi,ious dis,retion. %10) 9rial M 2'&&Jemarks and Condu,t o/ >ud6e. ?n a 4i/e@s a,tion /or divor,e" LLt3e trial 5ud6e@s remarks to plainti//@s ,ounsel in re6ard to 4as3in6 +dirt- linen"2 /ollo4ed b- t3e announ,ement o/ 3is +4aiver2 o/ alimon- /or plainti//" LLindi,atin6 3is uns-mpat3eti, attitude to4ard t3e liti6ation" do not a,,ord 4it3 re,o6niIed prin,iples o/ 5udi,ial de,orum.

%11) Be4 9rial M 1%'&&://idavits&&?rre6ularit- in =ro,eedin6s. 93e mere absen,e o/ an a//idavit in support o/ a motion /or ne4 trial does not prevent a plainti// in a divor,e a,tion /rom ur6in6 on appeal t3e alle6ed mis,ondu,t o/ t3e trial 5ud6e 43i,3 ma- 3ave denied 3er a /air trial" 43ere in movin6 /or a ne4 trial under Code Civ. =ro,." M %5'" subd. 1" s3e relied 43oll- on /a,ts appearin6 on t3e /a,e o/ t3e re,ord" sin,e in su,3 a ,ase t3e reason /or t3e rule re0uirin6 a//idavits ,eases and t3e rule itsel/ is inappli,able. )Civ. Code" M 3510.* )!isapprovin6 Estate o' Magerl% 201 Cal. 1%2" 1%(" 25% =. 2047 Jennings v. Aay% ' C.:.)2d* 555" 55(" 4% =.2d 193.* $#MM:JK :== :L /rom a 5ud6ment o/ t3e $uperior Court o/ Los :n6eles Count-. C3arles $. Durnell" >ud6e. Jeversed. :,tion /or divor,e. ?nterlo,utor- 5ud6ment /or plainti// 43i,3 denied 3er attorne-@s /ees and support and maintenan,e" reversed. CH#B$ L Mars3all $timson" Boel d4ards and C3arles Murstein /or :ppellant. $tanle- M. vans and >. >. Hu63es /or Jespondent. $= BC " >. =lainti// ,ommen,ed t3is a,tion /or divor,e on t3e 6round o/ eAtreme ,ruelt-. !e/endant ans4ered and /iled a ,ross&,omplaint" but at t3e trial 3e o//ered no eviden,e in support t3ereo/. =lainti// 4as a4arded an interlo,utor- de,ree o/ divor,e" t3e ,ustod- o/ t3e 1'&-ear&old son o/ t3e parties" and one&3al/ o/ t3e ,ommunit- propert-" ,onsistin6 o/ G50 o/ postal savin6s bonds. LL$3e 3as appealed /rom t3e +interlo,utor- 5ud6ment"2 dire,tin6 3er ,omplaint to +t3ose portions2 t3ereo/ +43i,3 denied ;3er< ... provision /or 3er support and maintenan,e and ... attorne-@s /ees /or prose,utin6 said a,tion" as ... pra-ed /or.2 :s 3er prin,ipal 6round /or reversal" plainti// ,laims t3at t3e trial ,ourt ,ommitted pre5udi,ial error in den-in6 3er a /air trial on t3ese spe,i/ied issues. )1* +;W<3et3er or not t3e error ,omplained o/ 3as produ,ed substantial in5ur- to t3e appellant is al4a-s a proper 0uestion /or ,onsideration upon appeal.2 ) Peters v. Peters% 15% Cal. 32" 3' ; 103 =. 219" 23 L.J.:. B.$. %99<7 see" also" Arnold v. Arnold% '% Cal.:pp.2d (''" ((0 ; 1'4 =.2d %'4<.* W3ile a 5ud6ment s3ould not be reversed unless" a/ter an eAamination o/ t3e entire re,ord" it appears t3at t3e alle6ed error +3as resulted in a mis,arria6e o/ 5usti,e2 )Cal. Const." art. 8?" M 4 1S2*" LLsu,3 is t3e situation 3ere as evin,ed b- t3e de,lared attitude o/ t3e trial 5ud6e durin6 t3e presentation o/ plainti//@s ,ase. )2* $o pertinent is t3e /ollo4in6 lan6ua6e /rom Pratt v. Pratt% 141 Cal. 24'" at pa6e 252 ; '4 =. '42<F +93e trial o/ a ,ase s3ould not onl- be /air in /a,t" LLbut it s3ould also appear to be /air. :nd 43ere t3e ,ontrar- appears" it s3o,ks t3e 5udi,ial instin,t to allo4 t3e 5ud6ment to stand.2 )3* 93e re,ord s3o4s t3e material /a,ts to be as /ollo4sF =lainti// and de/endant 3ad been married about 3% -ears prior to t3e date o/ t3eir separation in Februar-" 194%. 93ere 4ere ei63t ,3ildren t3e issue o/ said marria6e" all o/ 43om at t3e time o/ trial&in >anuar-" 194'&3ad attained t3eir ma5orit- eA,ept /or t3e one son" 43o 3ad re,entl- entered t3e #nited $tates :rm-. =lainti// testi/ied t3at s3e 4as 53 -ears o/ a6e" and t3at s3e 3ad no propert- or ot3er sour,e o/ in,ome. $3e 3ad be,ome +nervous" 6rieved and ill2 to t3e eAtent t3at s3e ,ould not lon6er endure de/endant@s /126 ,ondu,t to4ard 3er" but at t3e time o/ trial s3e 4as in +/airl- 6ood2 3ealt3. Ho4ever" 3er e-es 4ere +apparentl- 4eak"2 and s3e 4as +in need o/ e-e6lasses.2 $3e also 3ad a number o/ ,avities in 3er teet3" and s3e su//ered pain b- reason t3ereo/.

$3e testi/ied t3at s3e 3ad no +trade or ... pro/ession ... b- 43i,3 ;to< earn a liveli3ood2 and 3ad not 4orked outside t3e 3ome durin6 t3e 3' -ears sin,e 3er marria6e eA,ept" insi6ni/i,antl- +durin6 t3e last t3ree mont3s2&at a kinder6arten /or +t4o 3ours a da- /or a 4eek"2 43ere s3e earned a total o/ G5.00" and at 3ouse4ork /or 43i,3 s3e re,eived G5.00 /or +t4o da-s@ 4ork.2 !e/endant testi/ied t3at 3e 4as %1 -ears o/ a6e and 4orked as a laborer. He 3ad 4orked +,ontinuousl-2 /or about +ei63t -ears2 4it3out missin6 +an- time at all2 until some t3ree 4eeks be/ore t3e trial" 43en 3e +4as laid o//.2 His +take&3ome pa-2 durin6 t3e last -ear o/ su,3 4ork ran6ed +/rom G40 to G4' a 4eek.2 He stated t3at 3e 3ad not sou63t ot3er emplo-ment" alt3ou63 3e +,ould 3ave 6one to 4ork at G140 a mont3"2 be,ause 3e +/i6ured t3is ;trial< 4as ,omin6 up2 and 3e +3ated to start on a ne4 5ob and t3en be o// a6ain.2 He /urt3er stated t3at +? am not a/raid t3at ? ,annot 6et a 5ob. ? ,an 6et a 5ob a6ain.2 93e trial 5ud6e 4as o/ t3e opinion t3at +an-bod- ,an 6et a 5ob no4 ... men or 4omen2 and t3at ,apable 4omen earn not less t3an G'.00 per da- /or seven or ei63t 3ours@ 3ouse4ork. $o statin6 t3at +t3ere are plent- o/ 5obs around"2 3e indi,ated earl- in t3e presentation o/ plainti//@s ,ase&and be/ore 3avin6 3eard 3er eviden,e as to need" ,ondition o/ 3ealt3" or la,k o/ means o/ support&t3at 3e 4as not /avorable to an a4ard o/ alimon-. 93ereupon de/endant@s ,ounsel o//ered to +4it3dra4 t3e ,ross&,omplaint i/ t3e- 4aive alimon-.2 93e /ollo4in6 ,ollo0u- t3en ensuedF +93e CourtF 93e- do not need to 4aive alimon-. LL#he Court will waive it 'or the!. +Mr. Murstein )plainti//@s ,ounsel*F W3at is t3at" -our HonorO +93e CourtF ? sa- t3e- do not 3ave to 4aive it7 the Court will waive it hi!sel'. +Mr. MursteinF 93is 4oman 3as been married /or 3' -ears. ? t3ink s3e is entitled to be supported. +93e CourtF Co a3ead and wash your dirty linen.? 4on@t stop -ou.2 : s3ort time later in de,larin6 ad5ournment /or t3e da-" t3e ,ourt statedF +:ll ri63t7 4e 4ill ,ontinue washing the *157 dirty linen tomorro4 mornin6 ... ? 4ill instru,t all 4itnesses in t3is ,ase to return tomorro4 at 10F30" and ? t3ink a/ter t3at ? 4ill eA,lude t3e 4itnesses. 93ere is no ne,essit- o/ 3avin6 t3em listen to t3e washing o' the dirty linen.2 93e neAt da- plainti// resumed 3er testimon-" dire,ted to t3e issue o/ support and maintenan,e as ,orrelated 4it3 3er estimate o/ +ne,essar- eApenses2 /or livin6 and medi,al needs" but t3e ,ourt kept ,omplainin6 o/ t3e +4aste o/ time.2 Later in t3e pro,eedin6s 43en plainti//@s ,ounsel" +,on,erned 4it3 ;t3e matter o/< support /or t3e plainti//"2 eApressed t3e desire to re,all 3er to t3e 4itness stand" t3e ,ourt statedF +? 3ave told -ou t3at ? am not 6oin6 to a4ard an- support. ? 3ave told -ou t3at several times ... ? 4is3 -ou 4ould please stop 4astin6 t3e Court@s time.2 !e/endant rested 3is ,ase 4it3out puttin6 on an- eviden,e" and t3e ,ourt announ,ed its 5ud6ment& t3at +plainti// 4ill take a de,ree" and t3e ,ommunit- propert-" 43i,3 ,onsists o/ G50 in =ostal $avin6s Donds" 4ill be divided e0uall- bet4een t3e plainti// and t3e de/endant" and t3e ,ustod- o/ t3e minor ,3ild ... 4ill be a4arded to t3e plainti//.2 LLBo /urt3er sum 4as allo4ed as additional /ees /or plainti//@s ,ounsel. He 3ad alread- re,eived" pursuant to de/endant@s pa-ment under a prior ,ourt order made banot3er 5ud6e" +t3e sum o/ G100 on a,,ount o/ attorne- /ees and G15 on a,,ount o/ ,osts.2 : +stipulation2 ,alled /or +t3e balan,e o/ attorne- /ees ... to be /iAed at t3e time o/ trial.2 ?t also appears t3at under a +preliminar- order2 made some 10 mont3s be/ore t3e trial" plainti// 3ad re,eived +t3e sum o/ G90 a mont3 /or t3e support o/ ;3ersel/< and t3e minor ,3ild.2

LLFrom t3is re,ital o/ t3e re,ord" it is apparent t3at plainti// did not 3ave a /air trial o/ 3er ,ause b- reason o/ t3e pre,on,eived and de,lared aversion o/ t3e trial 5ud6e to a4ard 3er /inan,ial relie/ ,onsistent 4it3 de/endant@s responsibilities. $e,tion 139 o/ t3e Civil Code provides t3at +;4<3ere a divor,e is 6ranted /or an o//ense o/ t3e 3usband" t3e ,ourt ma- ,ompel 3im to provide /or t3e maintenan,e o/ t3e ,3ildren o/ t3e marria6e" and to make su,3 suitable allo4an,e to t3e 4i/e /or 3er support" durin6 3er li/e or /or a s3orter period as t3e ,ourt ma- deem 5ust" having regard to the circu!stances o' the parties respectively.2 ) mp3asis added.* +93e t3eor- o/ t3is re0uirement is t3at t3e 3usband entered upon an obli6ation 43i,3 bound 3im to support 3is 4i/e durin6 t3e period o/ t3eir 5oint lives" t3at b- 3is o4n 4ron6 3e 3as /or,ed 3er to sever t3e relation 43i,3 enabled /128 3er to ,ompel t3e per/orman,e o/ t3is dut-" and t3at 3e is re0uired to make ,ompensation /or t3e o//ense ,ommitted b- 3im 43i,3 3as deprived 3er o/ t3e bene/it o/ t3e obli6ation.2 ) Arnold v. Arnold% supra% '% Cal.:pp.2d (''" ((5&((%.* :s above stated" plainti// 4as a 4oman 53 -ears old7 s3e 3ad been married to de/endant /or 3' -ears7 s3e 3ad borne 3im ei63t ,3ildren7 s3e 3ad no propert- or sour,e o/ in,ome ot3er t3an de/endant@s provision /or 3er7 s3e 3ad no business or pro/essional skill" no trainin6 or edu,ation" 43i,3 4ould e0uip 3er to earn a liveli3ood in t3e ,ompetitive 4orld7 and t3e ,ommunit- propert- sub5e,t to division bet4een t3e parties 4as o/ nominal value. W3ile plainti// 4as in +/airl- 6ood2 3ealt3" 3er e-es and teet3 needed attention" and s3e 3ad rea,3ed a period in 3er li/e 43en p3-si,al disabilit4ould ,ause 3er to be +laid up2 /or +t4o or t3ree da-s at a time2 at irre6ular intervals durin6 t3e -ear. 93e onl- t-pe o/ +6ain/ul emplo-ment2 open to 3er" in t3e li63t o/ 3er eAperien,e" 4as some /orm o/ +3ouse4ork2 or kindred a,tivit- not re0uirin6 an- spe,ial skill" but s3e 4as 4illin6 to seek su,3 4ork +in t3e /uture2 i/ 3er 3ealt3 4ould permit and s3e 4as +e0ual to it.2 ?n t3ese ,ir,umstan,es it 4as vitall- important to plainti// t3at s3e be a,,orded t3e /ullest opportunit- to ,onvin,e t3e trial 5ud6e o/ t3e propriet- o/ some allo4an,e /or 3er support and maintenan,e. LLDut instead" plainti// 4as /a,ed 4it3 t3e 3andi,ap o/ 3is predetermined disposition o/ t3at issue re6ardless o/ 43at 3er proo/ t3ereon mi63t be. 93us at t3e time o/ 3is announ,ement t3at 3e 4ould 4aive alimon- on be3al/ o/ plainti//" t3e trial 5ud6e 3ad 3eard plainti//@s ,ase onl- to t3e eAtent o/ testimon/rom de/endant )Code Civ. =ro,." M 2055* on t3e issue o/ 3is abilit- to pa-" and 3er o4n re,ital o/ t3e a,ts o/ ,ruelt- on 43i,3 s3e based 3er divor,e" as 4ell as re/eren,e to 3er mea6re re,eipts /rom 3er o4n industr- sin,e t3e parties 3ad separated. He t3en did not kno4 43at 4ould be t3e nature o/ plainti//@s s3o4in6 as to 3er needs and 3ealt3 ,ondition as a//e,tin6 t3e vital point o/ a suitable support allo4an,e" LLand 3e 3ad no ri63t" in advan,e o/ 3earin6 3er testimon-" to /ormulate a /iAed ,on,ept on t3at p3ase o/ 3er ,ase. )4* :s 4as said in Bosen'ield v. &osper% 45 Cal.:pp.2d 3%5" at pa6e 3'1 ; 114 =.2d 29<F +: trial 5ud6e s3ould not pre5ud6e t3e issues but s3ould keep an open mind until all o/ t3e eviden,e is presented to 3im.2 /12, !e/endant ar6ues t3at re6ardless o/ t3e trial 5ud6e@s premature ,omment a6ainst an alimon- a4ard" plainti// 3as no ,ause /or ,omplaint in t3e li63t o/ t3e eviden,e on t3at issue. ?n t3is ,onne,tion 3e ,ites t3e ,ase o/ La!6orn v. La!6orn% (0 Cal.:pp. 494 ; 251 =. 943<" 43ere an order +redu,in6 t3e amount o/ alimon- /rom G45 to G30 per mont32 4as a//irmed. ?t 4as t3ere stated t3at +43ere t3e eA&3usband is earnin6 4a6es b- dail- labor"2 alimon- s3ould not be allo4ed +in a sum indu,in6 idleness on t3e part o/ t3e eA&4i/e2 )p. 49(*" and a /indin6 o/ ,ruel a,ts 43i,3 3ave ,aused no serious detriment to t3e part- prevailin6 in t3e divor,e a,tion 4ould not 5usti/- an a4ard o/ +alimon- t3at 4ould be in an-4ise oppressive2 )p. 500*. Dut t3e /a,tual ,onsiderations provo,ative o/ t3ose observations must be 6iven due re6ard. 93ere +no ,3ildren ;4ere< involved2 ... +t3e parties ;4ere< bot3 -oun6 in -ears2 ... ;and< +t3e laudable 4is3 o/ t3e ;eA& 3usband< to remarr- ;re,ommended< t3at 3e s3ould not be so ,rippled in 3is /inan,es t3at anot3er 3ome ma- not be establis3ed" unless it

appears ... t3at t3e ne,essities o/ t3e /ormer 4i/e ,ompelled su,3 a ,ourse.2 )=p. 49(&499.* Moreover" t3e alimon- a4ard as redu,ed still allo4ed t3e eA&4i/e G30 per mont3" and t3ou63 s3e 4as unable +to /ollo4 3er pro/ession or ,allin6 as a trained nurse2 be,ause o/ a ,ertain p3-si,al ailment" +in ot3er parti,ulars t3e re,ord2 s3o4ed 3er to be +an ordinar- 3ealt3/ul person2 )p. 49'*" ,apable o/ /indin6 emplo-ment +in ot3er /ields o/ labor2 but evin,in6 an un4illin6ness +to earn an- part o/ 3er o4n livin62 )p. 49(*. Here plainti//" a 4oman 53 -ears o/ a6e" t3e mot3er o/ ei63t ,3ildren" 3avin6 been o,,upied solel- 4it3 3er 3ouse3old duties durin6 some 3% -ears o/ married li/e 4it3 de/endant" and 4it3out trainin6 or eAperien,e in t3e industrial or business 4orld to /it 3er /or earnin6 3er o4n liveli3ood" LL4as allo4ed no provision /or support be,ause t3e trial 5ud6e t3ou63t +t3e- ;plainti// and de/endant< ,an bot3 6et a 5ob2 LLand so de,lared 3is intent not to make an alimon- a4ard be/ore plainti// presented 3er eviden,e o/ need t3ere/or. ?t is true t3at de/endant" a man %1 -ears o/ a6e" 4as dependent on 3is dail- labor as a means o/ support" but it 3as been saidF +: man past middle a6e ,an usuall- re3abilitate 3imsel/ in li/e in ,ase o/ a break in t3e marria6e relations. : 4oman o/ t3at a6e seldom ,an7 and t3e ,ourts maver- properl- sa/e6uard 3er /inan,ial /uture 43ere" b- t3e /ault o/ 3er 3usband" t3e marria6e is dissolved.2 ) arrar v. arrar% 41 Cal.:pp. 452" 45' ; 1(2 =. 9(9<.*/160 LL:lt3ou63 a/ter t3e trial 5ud6e@s untimel- ,omment on t3e alimon- issue plainti// 4as allo4ed to present eviden,e t3ereon" t3e re,ord s3o4s t3at 3e ,onsidered it +time 4asted"2 and t3at 3is predetermined state o/ mind ,ontinued to eAist. LL93us" at t3e end o/ t3e trial" 3e stubbornl- de,lared to plainti//@s ,ounselF +? 3ave told -ou t3at ? am not 6oin6 to a4ard an- support. ? 3ave told -ou t3at several times.2 :,,ordin6lt3e /indin6 4as made t3at +de/endant 3as no abilit- to earn more t3an su//i,ient /or 3is o4n support and maintenan,e ... and 3as no abilit- to pa- /urt3er /or t3e support and maintenan,e o/ plainti// or /or 3er attorne-@s /ees or Court ,osts 3erein.2 LL$u,3 /indin6 appears to be in,onsistent 4it3 de/endant@s o4n testimon- as to 43at 3e 3ad a,tuall- been doin6 in t3e 4a- o/ support /or 3imsel/ and /amil- in previous -ears b- virtue o/ 3is 4a6es /rom dail- labor&+G40 to G4' a 4eek ... take&3ome pa-.2 ?t is true t3at at t3e time o/ trial de/endant 4as not emplo-ed" but 3e 3ad been +laid o//2 onl- +a s3ort time2 and 3e 3ad purposel- re/rained /rom takin6 +a ne4 5ob2 be,ause o/ t3e imminen,e o/ t3e trial. !e/endant /reel- admitted t3at 4ork 4as available" t3at 3e +,ould 3ave 6one to 4ork at G140 a mont3" but ;3e< kne4 t3at t3is 4as ,omin6 up"2 and 3e 4as +not a/raid2 t3at 3e ,ould not +6et a 5ob a6ain.2 LL)5* Bot onl- t3e +3usband@s ;a,tual< earnin6s2 but +3is abilit- to earn mone-2 b- t3e use o/ reasonable e//ort 4ill a//e,t t3e propriet- o/ an alimon- a4ard. ) Mc"ann v. Mc"ann% (2 Cal.:pp.2d 3(2" 3(9 ; 1(% =.2d 424<7 see" also" Eiden!uller v. Eiden!uller% 3' Cal. 3%4" 3%%7 Peyre v. Peyre% '9 Cal. 33%" 340 ; 21 =. (3(<7 Merritt v. Merritt% 220 Cal. (5" (( ; 29 =.2d 190<.* )%* W3ile under a preliminarorder in t3is a,tion and pendin6 t3e trial" plainti// 3ad re,eived G900 /rom de/endant" representin6 10 mont3l- pa-ments o/ G90 /or t3e support o/ 3ersel/ and t3e minor son o/ t3e parties" su,3 /inan,ial relie/ over t3e limited period o/ time did not ,on,lude as a matter o/ la4 de/endant@s le6al responsibilit- to make /urt3er ,ontributions /or 3er support ,ommensurate 4it3 3is abilit-. )'* Like4ise 43et3er or not plainti//" durin6 t3ose 10 mont3s" made ade0uate e//ort to /ind suitable 4ork& ,onsistent 4it3 3er a6e" abilit- and 3ealt3 ,ondition&and to establis3 3ersel/ as at least partiall- sel/&supportin6 4ould enter into t3e over&all pi,ture in determinin6 t3e 0uestion o/ de/endant@s obli6ation to make some provision /or 3er. ) arrar v. arrar% supra% 41 Cal.:pp. 452" 45'.* /161 )(* #n0uestionabl-" +;t<3e 6rantin6 and re/usin6 o/ alimon- in a,tions /or divor,e is a matter 43i,3 lies lar6el- in t3e dis,retion o/ t3e trial ,ourt.2 ) ?aldwin v. ?aldwin% 2( Cal.2d 40%" 413 ; 1'0 =.2d %'0<.* LLHo4ever" su,3 dis,retion must be a 5udi,ious one based upon all o/ t3e /a,ts and ,ir,umstan,es o/ t3e ,ase. ) ine v. ine% '% Cal.:pp.2d 490" 495 ; 1'3 =.2d 355<.* Here it plainl- appears t3at t3ere 4as

no eAer,ise o/ dis,retion in resolvin6 t3e ,on/li,tin6 in/eren,es 43i,3 mi63t reasonabl- 3ave been dra4n /rom t3e entire eviden,e ultimatel- addu,ed on t3e matter o/ /inan,ial relie/ sou63t b- plainti//" but rat3er an arbitrar- determination o/ t3e opposin6 ,onsiderations in line 4it3 t3e biased and pre5udi,ed attitude o/ t3e trial 5ud6e as re/le,ted in 3is announ,ed pre5ud6ment o/ t3e issue. LL?t 3as been 3eld t3at a +/air trial2 4as not a,,orded t3e parties 43ere +t3e trial 5ud6e virtuallt3reatened to pre5ud6e ;,ertain previous< testimon-2 in t3e event a proposed 4itness s3ould take t3e stand and so +undertook to and did in a ver- irre6ular 4a- ,ontrol t3e ,ondu,t o/ t3e ,ase2 ) Pratt v. Pratt% supra% 141 Cal. 24'" 251*7 43ere +t3e trial 5ud6e2 4as unsu,,ess/ul in 3is endeavor to /or,e t3e de/endants to ,ompromise t3e plainti//@s ,laim at a ,ertain /i6ure despite 3is admonition t3at +it 4ould be to t3eir best interests to settle on t3at basis"2 and t3erea/ter 3e 4as +not in a position to 3ear t3e 4itnesses /or de/endants 4it3 an open mind"2 /or 3e 3ad /ailed in 3is +dut- to re/rain /rom /ormin6 an opinion on ;/a,tual< issues until t3e ,ase 4as /inall- submitted to 3im2 ) Bosen'ield v. &osper% supra% 45 Cal.:pp.2d 3%5" 3'2*7 and 43ere +t3e trial 5ud6e2 announ,ed 3is aversion to 6rantin6 +plainti// separate maintenan,e2 and tried unavailin6l- to persuade 3er +to amend 3er ,omplaint to pra/or divor,e"2 4it3 t3e result t3at s3e 3ad to pro,eed 4it3 3er ,ase +under t3e 3andi,ap o/ a pre,on,eived and de,lared disin,lination o/ t3e 5ud6e to a4ard 3er t3e onl- relie/ 43i,3 s3e sou63t2 LL) Ael Buth v. Ael Buth% '5 Cal.:pp.2d %3(" %4( ; 1'1 =.2d 34<*. LL93e same le6al prin,iple prevails 3ere in a,,ord 4it3 t3e di,tates o/ 5usti,e" 43ere plainti//@s subse0uent presentation o/ eviden,e as to 3er need /or a suitable support allo4an,e" +3avin6 re6ard to t3e ,ir,umstan,es o/ t3e parties respe,tivel-2 )Civ. Code" M 139*" be,ame meanin6less in t3e /a,e o/ t3e trial 5ud6e@s pre5ud6ment o/ t3at issue a6ainst 3er" and s3e 4as in e//e,t deprived o/ 3er da- in ,ourt on a matter vitall- a//e,tin6 3er substantial ri63ts. 93ere is no /162 need 3ere to spe,ulate on 43et3er or not t3e result 4ould 3ave been t3e same 3ad all t3e relevant eviden,e on t3e support issue re,eived t3e trial 5ud6e@s /ull and impartial ,onsideration" and t3e matter been de,ided in t3e eAer,ise o/ 3is dis,retion. ?n anevent plainti// 4as entitled to a /air trial on t3is p3ase o/ 3er ,ase" and under t3e ,ir,umstan,es s3e 4as pe,uliarl- in need o/ one. )C/." Arnold v. Arnold% supra% '% Cal.:pp.2d (''" ((%.* D- reason o/ t3ese observations t3ere appears to be ,onsiderable merit to plainti//@s ob5e,tion to t3e denial o/ /urt3er attorne-@s /ees /or 3er ,ounsel as ,ontemplated bt3e terms o/ t3e a/orementioned stipulation bet4een t3e parties" as 4ell as b- t3e ,ited statute. ?n t3is re6ard" as 4it3 t3e denial o/ a suitable a4ard to plainti// /or 3er support" t3e dominatin6 /a,tor seems to 3ave been t3e trial 5ud6e@s bias and pre5udi,e to allo4in6 3er su,3 /inan,ial relie/ re6ardless o/ an- s3o4in6 o/ need t3ere/or" and 3is ,onse0uent /ailure to determine su,3 issues in t3e eAer,ise o/ a 5udi,ious dis,retion. ) ine v. ine% supra% '% Cal.:pp.2d 490" 495.* :,,ordin6lt3is matter" too" s3ould /163 be 6iven /urt3er ,onsideration in t3e li63t o/ t3e various /a,tors o/ re,ord a//e,tin6 its disposition. )10* LL:s a /urt3er point to be noti,ed on t3is appeal" it is appropriate to mention t3e unbe,omin6 ,ondu,t o/ t3e trial 5ud6e in 3is order to plainti//@s ,ounsel to +6o a3ead and 4as3 -our dirt- linen.2 :s appears /rom t3e above revie4 o/ t3e re,ord" su,3 dispara6in6 remark /ollo4ed t3e trial 5ud6e@s announ,ement o/ 3is +4aiver2 o/ alimon- /or plainti//" and ,ould 3ave 3ad no e//e,t upon 3er ot3er t3an to emp3asiIe t3e unlikeli3ood o/ 3is 3earin6" ,onsiderin6 and determinin6 3er ,ause upon its merits. Moreover" in 5usti,e to t3e parties" it must be said t3at" in /a,t" t3ere 4as no +dirt- linen2 4as3ed at t3e trial. :s ordinaril- used" t3at p3rase implies t3at vi,es and immoralties 3ave been ,3ar6ed7 t3at mean a,,usations and vile re,riminations 3ave been spoken. )$ee t3e HA/ord n6. !i,t.7 Webster@s Be4 ?nternational !i,t." 2d ed.* Bo su,3 eviden,e appears in t3e re,ord. =rior to t3e trial 5ud6e@s ob5e,tionable re/eren,e" plainti// in plain and simple 4ords 3ad re,ounted t3e -ears o/ 3er li/e 4it3 de/endant" t3e number o/ t3eir ,3ildren" t3e

-ears o/ 3er residen,e in t3e ,ount-" and de/endant@s a,ts o/ ,ruelt-. 93e latter ,onsisted o/ a drab narrative o/ various uneAplained absen,es o/ de/endant /rom 3is 3ome7 3is re/usals to take 3er to pla,es o/ amusement or to visit t3eir /riends7 3is de,larations t3at 3e did not love 3er" and t3at s3e 4as 4ort3less and not /it to be a mot3er. Ho4ever" despite su,3 ,olorless re,ital b- plainti// o/ 3er li/e 4it3 de/endant" t3e trial 5ud6e a66ravated t3e point o/ 3is unbe,omin6" LLas 4ell as ina,,urate" ,3ara,teriIation o/ t3e matters in ,ontrovers- b- repeatedl- re/errin6 to t3e ,ase" at various later sta6es in t3e pro,eedin6" as involvin6 t3e +4as3in6 o/ t3e dirt- linen.2 $u,3 ,ondu,t on t3e part o/ t3e trial 5ud6e" indi,atin6 3is uns-mpat3eti, attitude to4ard t3e liti6ation" does not a,,ord 4it3 re,o6niIed prin,iples o/ 5udi,ial de,orum ,onsistent 4it3 t3e presentation o/ a ,ase in an atmosp3ere o/ /airness and impartialit-" and it ,annot be ,ondoned. From 43at 3as been said" it appears t3at t3ere s3ould be a reversal" and t3e 0uestion arises as to 43et3er t3e interlo,utor- 5ud6ment s3ould be reversed in 43ole or in part. 93e appeal 4as taken +/rom t3e 43ole o/ said ?nterlo,utor- >ud6ment o/ !ivor,e"2 and also /rom ,ertain portions t3ereo/. ?n vie4 o/ t3e situation 43i,3 developed on t3e trial" t3e ,ause presented b- t3e pleadin6s appears to 3ave been onl- partialltried. !e/endant made an o//er to +4it3dra4 t3e ,ross&,omplaint i/ t3e- 4aive alimon-.2 93is 4as a ,onditional o//er" 43i,3 4as never a,,epted b- plainti//. 93erea/ter de/endant introdu,ed no eviden,e in vie4 o/ t3e trial /162 5ud6e@s several de,larations t3at no alimon- 4ould be a4arded. ?t t3ere/ore appears appropriate to reverse t3e interlo,utor- 5ud6ment in its entiret-" to t3e end t3at t3e ,ause ma- be /ull- 3eard upon t3e merits. Ho4ever" not3in6 43i,3 3as been said 3erein is intended to impl- t3at plainti// 4ill ne,essaril- be entitled to a de,ree o/ divor,e upon a retrial o/ t3e ,ause" or t3at an- de,ree o/ divor,e 43i,3 ma- be 6ranted to 3er must ne,essaril- make an allo4an,e /or 3er support or /or attorne-@s /ees. Dut 4e do 3old t3at bot3 parties are entitled to a /ull and /air 3earin6 on all t3e issues made bt3e pleadin6s" and t3at t3e- are entitled to t3e eAer,ise o/ a true dis,retion b- t3e trial ,ourt /ollo4in6 su,3 3earin6. 93e interlo,utor- 5ud6ment o/ divor,e is reversed. Lester v. Lennane, 84 Cal.(...4th 236, 101 Cal.:.tr.2d 86, 00 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 8801, 2000 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 11,622 %Cal.(... 3 -ist., 4ct 31, 2000) Lennane points to a 6ood deal o/ t3e material 4e 3ave set out above as eviden,e o/ >ud6e Noba-as3i@s supposed 6ender bias in t3is p3ase o/ t3e pro,eedin6s. He also ,ompares >ud6e Noba-as3i@s ,ondu,t to t3at o/ trial 5ud6es in t4o re,ent ,ases )neit3er o/ 43i,3 is a ,3ild ,ustod- ,ase* 43ose rulin6s 4ere overturned on appeal /or 6ender bias. )Catchpole v. ?rannon )1995* 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 23' ;42 Cal.Jptr.2d 440< )Catchpole*7 In re Marriage o' Iverson )1992* 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 1495 ;15 Cal.Jptr.2d '0< )Iverson*.* :s 4e s3all demonstrate" Lennane@s ,laims are meritless" and t3e ,ondu,t o/ t3e trial 5ud6es in Catchpole and Iverson )43i,3 4e s3all dis,uss in detail in a moment* bears no resemblan,e to t3at o/ >ud6e Noba-as3i 3ere. Lennane ,ites R/a,torsR identi/ied in Catchpole and Iverson as tendin6 to s3o4 5udi,ial 6ender biasF lan6ua6e t3at betra-s 6ender stereot-pin6" Rdisdain and impatien,eR to4ard t3e part- 43o is t3e ob5e,t o/ bias" and eviden,e o/ a Rpredetermined dispositionR to rule a6ainst t3at part-. )Catchpole% supra" 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 at pp. 24'" 251" 253" 2597 Iverson% supra" 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 at pp. 149(" 1500.* W3en embedded in ri6orous anal-ses o/ t3e /a,ts o/ parti,ular ,ases" as t3e4ere in Catchpole and Iverson" t3ese R/a,torsR ,an be 3elp/ul7 in t3e abstra,t" 3o4ever" t3e- are not. Hnl- t3e /irst R/a,torR su66ests 6ender bias in parti,ular" and it is not enou63 b- itsel/ to prove t3e point. R!isdain and impatien,e"R t3ou63 re6rettable in a 5ud6e" need not sprin6 /rom 6ender bias )or an- ot3er kind*. 93e last

R/a,torR adds not3in6" but simpl- de/ines bias. Moreover" t3ese R/a,torsR lend t3emselves to abuse t3rou63 0uotation out o/ ,onteAt" as Lennane@s ar6ument demonstrates. Lennane 0uotes t3e /ollo4in6 ,omments /rom t3e order o/ $eptember 15" 199(" to prove bot3 >ud6e Noba-as3i@s Rdisdain and impatien,eR to4ard Lennane and t3e 5ud6e@s Rrelian,e on outmoded ;6ender< stereot-pesR to Lennane@s detrimentF )1* t3e 5ud6e@s re/eren,e to Lennane@s Rin,essant and in,reasin6 demand /or e0ual parentin6 time o/ a ,3ild 43o 4as ,on,eived as a result o/ t3e proverbial one or t4o ni63t standR7 )2* t3e 5ud6e@s statement t3at 3e did Rnot need to be inundated 4it3 ,ase and statutoraut3orit- t3at /284 /at3er is le6all- )as opposed to 43at is in t3e ,3ild@s best interest* entitled to 50S50 ,ustodial time irrespe,tive o/ t3e ,3ild@s a6e" p3-si,al ,ondition" et,.R7 )3* t3e 5ud6e@s statement t3at Ri/ mot3er ,an not per/orm all o/ t3e /un,tions normall- asso,iated 4it3 t3e mot3er but 4is3es to 3ave a t3ird person per/orm t3em" t3en /at3er s3ould be allo4ed to do so provided t3at t3e ,3ild development eAperts opine t3at it 4ould be appropriate /or /at3er to do so.R We are not persuaded. :oit= v. Cold8ell &an5er :esidential &ro5era!e Co., 62 Cal.(...4th 116, 13 Cal.:.tr.2d 82, ,8 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 2201, ,8 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 3048 %Cal.(... 2 -ist. Mar 26, 1,,8)

opinion applies to abitrator

;3< J$d!es 4,%1) 22'k49)1* Most Cited Cases $tandard /or dis0uali/i,ation o/ 5ud6e under subdivision o/ statute providin6 /or dis0uali/i,ation 43ere person a4are o/ /a,ts mi63t reasonabl- entertain doubt t3at 5ud6e 4ould be able to be impartial or t3ere is bias or pre5udi,e to4ards a la4-er in pro,eedin6 is ob5e,tive. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1)a*)%*)C*. ;4< (lternative -is.$te :esol$tion 332 259k335 Most Cited Cases )Formerl- 33k%4.3 :rbitration* :rbitration a4ard ma- be va,ated i/ re,ord reveals /a,ts 43i,3 mi63t ,reate impression o/ possible bias in e-es o/ 3-pot3eti,al" reasonable person7 a,tual bias is not re0uired. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. MM 1'0.1)a*)%*)C*" 12(%.2)/*. ;2< (lternative -is.$te :esol$tion 332 259k335 Most Cited Cases )Formerl- 33k%4.3 :rbitration* W3en revie4in6 ,3ar6e o/ bias a6ainst arbitrator" liti6ants@ ne,essaril- partisan vie4s s3ould not provide appli,able /rame o/ re/eren,e. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1)a*)%*)C*. ;1< (lternative -is.$te :esol$tion 332 259k335 Most Cited Cases )Formerl- 33k%4.3 :rbitration* Dias or pre5udi,e on part o/ arbitrator ,onsists o/ mental attitude or disposition o/ arbitrator to4ards or a6ainst part- to liti6ation7 neit3er strained relations bet4een arbitrator and attorne- /or part- nor eApressions o/ opinion uttered b- arbitrator" in 43at 3e ,on,eives to be dis,3ar6e o/ 3is o//i,ial duties" are not eviden,e o/ bias or pre5udi,e. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1)a*)%*)C*. ;3<;4< 93e standard /or dis0uali/i,ation under subdivision )a*)%*)C* o/ se,tion 1'0.1 is ob5e,tive. ) lier v. )uperior Court )1994* 23 Cal.:pp.4t3 1%5" 1'0" 2(

Cal.Jptr.2d 3(3.* 93us" an a4ard ma- be va,ated i/ Rt3e re,ord reveals /a,ts 43i,3 mi63t ,reate an impression o/ possible bias in t3e e-es o/ t3e 3-pot3eti,al" reasonable person. ;Citation.<R )Ceriale v. AMC$ Ins. Co. )199%* 4( Cal.:pp.4t3 500" 504" 55 Cal.Jptr.2d %(5.* :,tual bias is not re0uired. ) lier v. )uperior Court% supra% 23 Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 1'0" 2( Cal.Jptr.2d 3(3.* RW3ere t3e avera6e person ,ould 4ell entertain doubt 43et3er t3e ;ad5udi,ator< 4as impartial" appellate ,ourts are not re0uired to spe,ulate 43et3er t3e bias 4as a,tual or merel- apparent" or 43et3er t3e result 4ould 3ave been t3e same i/ t3e eviden,e 3ad been impartiall,onsidered and t3e matter dispassionatel- de,ided ;,itations<" but s3ould reverse t3e 5ud6ment and remand t3e matter to a di//erent ;ad5udi,ator< /or a ne4 ;3earin6< on all issues. ;Citations.<B %Catchpole v. Brannon %1,,2) 36 Cal.(...4th 231, 241, 42 Cal.:.tr.2d 440" /n. omitted.* ;5<;%<;'< /124 W3en revie4in6 a ,3ar6e o/ bias" Rt3e liti6ants@ ne,essarilpartisan vie4s s3ould not provide t3e appli,able /rame o/ re/eren,e. ;Citations.<R )(nited ar! Workers o' A!erica v. )uperior Court )19(5* 1'0 Cal.:pp.3d 9'" 104" 21% Cal.Jptr. 4.* =otential bias and pre5udi,e must ,learl- be establis3ed )"ray v. City o' "ustine )1990* 224 Cal.:pp.3d %21" %32" 2'3 Cal.Jptr. '30* and statutes aut3oriIin6 dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e on 6rounds o/ bias must be applied 4it3 restraint. )McClenny v. )uperior Court )19%4* %0 Cal.2d %''" %(0" 3% Cal.Jptr. 459" 3(( =.2d %91.* RDias or pre5udi,e ,onsists o/ a @mental attitude or disposition o/ a 5ud6e to4ards ;or a6ainst< a part- to t3e liti6ation....@ R )Ensher% Ale:ander < ?arsoo! v. Ensher )19%4* 225 Cal.:pp.2d 31(" 322" 3' Cal.Jptr. 32'" 0uotin6 Evans v. )uperior Court )1930* 10' Cal.:pp. 3'2" 3(0" 290 =. %%2.* Beit3er strained relations bet4een a 5ud6e and an attorne- /or a part- nor R;e<Apressions o/ opinion uttered b- a 5ud6e" in 43at 3e ,on,eived to be a dis,3ar6e o/ 3is o//i,ial duties" are ... eviden,e o/ bias or pre5udi,e. ;Citation.<R )Jack aren6augh < )on v. ?el!ont Construction% Inc. )19('* 194 Cal.:pp.3d 1023" 1031" 240 Cal.Jptr. '(.* 9urnin6 to t3e /a,ts o/ t3e instant ,ase" appellant@s basi, ar6ument is t3at t3e arbitrator@s //,0 re/usal to ,ontinue t3e 3earin6 and 4aive 3is /ee /or :u6ust 19 and 20 eA3ibited bias to4ards appellant" 43i,3 6ave rise to dis0uali/i,ation pursuant to se,tion 1'0.1" subdivision )a*)%*)C*. We disa6ree. ;(< 9urnin6 /irst to t3e re0uest /or a ,ontinuan,e" appellant demonstrated no 6ood ,ause /or t3e re0uest. ?n Moore v. "ri''ith )1942* 51 Cal.:pp.2d 3(%" 124 =.2d 900" a ,ase ,ited and relied upon b- bot3 parties" t3e ,ourt addressed a similar /a,t situation and re5e,ted an ar6ument t3at a ,ontinuan,e s3ould 3ave been 6ranted. R?t does not appear t3at an- s3o4in6 4as made be/ore t3e arbitrators b- a//idavit or under oat3 o/ t3e materialit- o/ an- eviden,e eApe,ted to be 6iven b- t3is 4itness or o/ andili6en,e used to pro,ure 3is attendan,e" nor t3at an- re0uest /or time to prepare or present an- su,3 a//idavit 4as made. @: motion to postpone a trial on t3e 6round o/ t3e absen,e o/ eviden,e ,an onl- be made upon a//idavit s3o4in6 t3e materialit- o/ t3e eviden,e eApe,ted to be obtained" and t3at due dili6en,e 3as been used to pro,ure it.@ )M 595" Code Civ. =ro,.*R )Id. at p. 3(9" 124 =.2d 900.* Here" appellant made no s3o4in6 43- t3e do,tors needed to be at t3e 3earin6. 93e arbitrator ,ommented t3at 3e 3ad t3e various medi,al re,ords and ,ould re/er to t3em. Bo o//er o/ proo/ 4as made b- appellant 43- t3is 4as insu//i,ient to establis3 t3e point appellant desired to make t3rou63 eit3er o/ t3ese 4itnesses. ?t is ,ommon pra,ti,e at arbitrations t3at medi,al re,ords" de,larations and deposition trans,ripts are o/ten used as eviden,e in lieu o/ live testimon-. Calho$n v. S$.erior Co$rt o0 San -ie!o Co$nt3, 21 Cal.2d 221, 331 +.2d 648 %Cal. 'ov 18, 1,28)

Jevie4 ,itations

+aci0ic etc. Con0erence o0 United Methodist Ch$rch v. S$.erior Co$rt, 82 Cal.(...3d 12, 141 Cal.:.tr. 44 %Cal.(... 4 -ist. J$n 23, 1,18) $#MM:JK 93e Court o/ :ppeal issued a 4rit o/ mandate pro3ibitin6 an assi6ned la4 and motion 5ud6e /rom 3earin6 /urt3er matters in t3e underl-in6 a,tion. LL93e ,ourt 3eld t3at a letter 4ritten b- t3e 5ud6e to all ,ounsel" a/ter t3e 5ud6e 3ad 3eard a series o/ pretrial matters" and 3ad pendin6 be/ore 3im a motion /or dis,over-" a ,lass ,erti/i,ation motion" a demurrer and a ,ontinued motion /or preliminar- in5un,tion" s3o4ed t3e 5ud6e 3ad pre5ud6ed issues be/ore 3im as 4ell as issues and parties not be/ore 3im. LL93e ,ourt 3eld t3e 5ud6e appeared to 3ave pre5ud6ed t3e out,ome o/ spe,i/i, pretrial matters be/ore 3im be/ore 3e 4as aut3oriIed to ,ommen,e 3is ,on,lusionar- t3inkin6. LL93e ,ourt 3eld t3at t3e bias and pre5udi,e demonstrated t3ereb- dis0uali/ied t3e 5ud6e /rom /urt3er 3earin6 or rulin6 on an- matter related to t3e underl-in6 a,tion. :,,ordin6l-" t3e denial o/ a motion to dis0uali/- t3e 5ud6e pursuant to Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5" 4as an abuse o/ dis,retion. 93e ,ourt /urt3er 3eld t3at denial o/ t3e motion to dis0uali/- le/t petitioner 4it3 no ade0uate remed- at la4" as a peremptor- ,3allen6e 4ould 3ave been untimel-" and" moreover" poli,- and reason di,tate a6ainst re0uirin6 a part- to eA3aust t3e ri63t to dis0uali/a 5ud6e peremptoril- be/ore seekin6 vindi,ation o/ t3e ri63t to dis0uali/- a 5ud6e /or ,ause. 93us" sin,e mandamus is available to ,orre,t an abuse o/ dis,retion" petitioner 4as entitled to relie/ pursuant to t3at 4rit. )Hpinion b- $tani/ort3" >." 4it3 Dro4n )Cerald*" =. >." and Colo6ne" >." ,on,urrin6.* %2) Mandamus and =ro3ibition M 15&&Mandamus&&Conditions ://e,tin6 ?ssuan,e&& Aisten,e and :de0ua,- o/ Ht3er Jemed-&&Jemed- b- :ppeal. : part- to a la4suit 43ose motion to dis0uali/- t3e la4 and motion 5ud6e /or bias and pre5udi,e 4as denied" did not 3ave an ade0uate remed- at la4 b- appeal /rom t3e /inal 5ud6ment" /or purposes o/ determinin6 t3e ri63t to relie/ b- mandamus. =reliminarrelie/ and ,lass ,erti/i,ation 4ere issues be/ore t3e 5ud6e" and t3e part- s3ould not be /or,ed to present a lon6 and eApensive de/ense to a suit 43i,3 mi63t not 3ave ,ontinued 3ad preliminar- relie/ and ,lass ,erti/i,ation not been 6ranted. LLBeit3er s3ould t3e part- be re0uired to pro,eed to trial 4it3out t3e bene/its a//orded b- an impartial" unbiased 5ud6e 3earin6 entire pretrial matters" and t3e issue o/ bias" i/ le/t unresolved" mi63t in/e,t t3e entire subse0uent pro,eedin6s 4it3 /atal error. %4) Mandamus and =ro3ibition M '&&Mandamus&&Conditions ://e,tin6 ?ssuan,e&& !is,retion. W3ile mandamus 4ill not lie to ,ontrol t3e eAer,ise o/ dis,retion" t3e 4rit is available to ,orre,t an abuse o/ dis,retion. %2) Mandamus and =ro3ibition M 2(&&Mandamus&&9o Courts and Court H//i,ers&& Control o/ >udi,ial !is,retion. Mandamus 4ill not lie to ,ontrol dis,retion o/ a ,ourt or 5udi,ial o//i,er or to ,ompel its eAer,ise in a parti,ular manner eA,ept 43en" under t3e /a,ts" dis,retion ,an be le6all- eAer,ised in but one 4a-. %6a, 6*, 6c, , ) >ud6es M 19&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Mandamus and =ro3ibition&&Dias or =re5udi,e. 93e denial o/ a part-@s motion to dis0uali/- a la4 and motion 5ud6e /or bias and pre5udi,e pursuant to Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5" 4as an abuse o/ dis,retion entitlin6 t3e part- to a 4rit o/ mandate dire,tin6 t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ t3e 5ud6e /rom /urt3er pro,eedin6s in t3e underl-in6 a,tion" 43ere t3e 5ud6e 3ad 4ritten a letter to all ,ounsel eApressin6 opinions re6ardin6 t3e posture o/ t3e ,ase t3at s3o4ed 3e 3ad pre5ud6ed 4it3out /a,ts and 4it3out 3earin6 t3e ultimate out,ome o/ a

,ompleA ,ase to t3e movin6 part-@s detriment" 43ere it 4as probable t3at su,3 part,ould not obtain a /air and impartial 3earin6 be/ore t3e 5ud6e on disputed matters re0uirin6 resolution o/ disputed /a,tual issues" and 43ere lan6ua6e in t3e letter indi,ated t3at t3e 5ud6e 3ad adopted a mental attitude or disposition a6ainst t3e movin6 part-. ;$ee Cal.J$r.3d" >ud6es" M 33(6.J$r.2d" >ud6es" M 1%9.< ;FB%< Cooke v. #.$." 2%' #.$. 51'" 45 $. Ct. 390" %9 L. d. '%' )1925* %1) >ud6es M 19&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Mandamus and =ro3ibition&&Dias or =re5udi,e. W3ere a 5ud6e 6ratuitousl- o//ers an opinion on a matter not -et pendin6 be/ore 3im and t3ereb- s3o4s a bias or pre5udi,e a6ainst a part-" a 4rit o/ mandate 4ill issue pre,ludin6 t3e 5ud6e /rom 3earin6 t3at matter. %8) >ud6es M 14&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias or =re5udi,e&&!e/inition. Dias as applied to a 5ud6e is de/ined as a mental predile,tion or pre5udi,e7 a leanin6 o/ t3e mind7 a predisposition to de,ide a ,ause or an issue in a ,ertain 4a-" 43i,3 does not leave t3e mind per/e,tl- open to ,onvi,tion. Dias or pre5udi,e ,onsists o/ a mental attitude or disposition o/ t3e 5ud6e to4ards a part- to t3e liti6ation. %,) >ud6es M 14&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias or =re5udi,e. ?n order /or a 5ud6e to be dis0uali/ied /or bias or pre5udi,e under Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5" t3e pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a parti,ular part-. $9:B?FHJ9H" >. =etitioner =a,i/i, and $out34est :nnual Con/eren,e o/ t3e #nited Met3odist C3ur,3 )Con/eren,e* seeks a 4rit o/ mandate )Code Civ. =ro,." M 10(5* ,ommandin6 t3e respondent superior ,ourt to dis0uali/- t3e Honorable Joss C. 93arp" 5ud6e o/ t3at ,ourt )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5*" /rom /urt3er 3earin6 o/ an- matter in t3e underl-in6 a,tion. :lternativel-" t3e Con/eren,e re0uests a 4rit )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1103* pro3ibitin6 >ud6e 93arp /rom 3earin6 an- matters in t3e underl-in6 a,tion. >ud6e 93arp is ,3allen6ed /or bias and pre5udi,e s3o4n a6ainst t3e Con/eren,e )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5* in pretrial 3earin6s. 93is ,ourt dire,ted t3e respondent superior ,ourt and Frank 9. Darr et al. )Jeal =artin ?nterest* to appear and s3o4 ,ause 43- >ud6e 93arp s3ould not be pro3ibited /rom 3earin6 /urt3er matters in t3e underl-in6 a,tion. #pon appli,ation b- t3e Con/eren,e" 4e dire,ted t3at all pro,eedin6s be/ore >ud6e 93arp be sta-ed 4it3out pre5udi,e to /urt3er pro,eedin6s be/ore anot3er 5ud6e. 93e superior ,ourt did not pro,eed be/ore anot3er 5ud6e" t3ereb- ne,essitatin6 /urt3er pro,eedin6s in t3is ,ourt. /16 93e #nderl-in6 :,tion 93e underl-in6 a,tion is a suit /or G2%% million dama6es brou63t b- t3e Jeal =art- in ?nterest a6ainst t3e Con/eren,e and ot3ers. 93e ,omplaint asserts t3e Con/eren,e is responsible to ,arr- out li/e ,are ,ontra,ts entered into b- elderl- persons 4it3 a retirement 3ome s-stem named =a,i/i, Homes" an a6ent or alter e6o o/ t3e Con/eren,e. :lt3ou63 t3e a,tion is still in t3e pleadin6 sta6e" a series o/ pretrial matters 3ave been 3eard&t3ree demurrers" one o/ 43i,3 is still pendin6" a motion to 0uas3" an eA parte appli,ation /or temporar- restrainin6 order" and an order to s3o4 ,ause in re preliminar- in5un,tion" as 4ell as a motion to 0uas3 servi,e o/ pro,ess brou63t on be3al/ o/ de/endants Ceneral Coun,il o/ Finan,e and :dministration o/ t3e #nited Met3odist C3ur,3 )CCF:* and t3e #nited Met3odist C3ur,3 )#MC*.

>ud6e 93arp" t3e assi6ned la4 and motion 5ud6e" 3eard and determined t3e motions to 0uas3&adversel- to CCF:" but /avorabl- to #MC&and ,ontinued t3e 3earin6 on Darr@s motion /or preliminar- in5un,tion t3en pendin6 be/ore 3im. >ud6e 93arp also 3ad pendin6 be/ore 3im Darr@s motion /or dis,over-" a ,lass ,erti/i,ation motion and t3e remainin6 demurrer&as 4ell as t3e ,ontinued motion /or preliminar- in5un,tion. :t t3is 5un,ture in t3e pretrial matters" on Mar,3 20" 19'(" >ud6e 93arp sent t3e /ollo4in6 letter to all ,ounsel. De,ause o/ t3e si6ni/i,an,e o/ ea,3 statement ,ontained" 4e 0uote in its entiret-F +JeF Frank 9. Darr v. #nited Met3odist C3ur,3" $uperior Court Bo. 404%11 +9o :ll Counsel o/ Je,ordF + n,losed please /ind m- rulin6 on t3e motions to 0uas3. +:ll parties 3ereto are ur6ed to re&eAamine t3eir respe,tive positions 4it3 a vie4 to4ard returnin6 to t3e ,on/eren,e table. $in,e ? 4ill not tr- t3is ,ase s3ould it pro,eed to trial" ? am takin6 t3e libert- o/ s3arin6 4it3 -ou m- appraisal o/ -our respe,tive positions. +First" ? believe t3e plainti//s@ ,laims a6ainst t3e =a,i/i, U $out34est Con/eren,e are meritorious and t3at t3e- 4ill in all probabilit- prevail at /11 time o/ trial. Like4ise" ? believe t3at plainti//s 4ill prevail a6ainst t3e CCF: on t3e alter e6o t3eor- in vie4 o/ t3e CCF:@s ,omplete domination and ,ontrol o/ t3e Con/eren,e. Furt3er" ? believe t3e a4ard o/ dama6es 4ill be enormous. +Hn t3e ot3er 3and" so /ar as plainti//s@ motion /or preliminar- relie/ is ,on,erned" i.e." t3eir pra-er to re0uire pa-ment o/ some G300"000 per mont3" t3ere is" at this ti!e" insu//i,ient eviden,e to establis3 an eAistin6 3ards3ip on t3e plainti//s. H/ t3e one 3undred and siAt- )1%0* named plainti//s" /e4er t3an siAt- )%0* supplied t3e in/ormation re0uested o/ t3em b- t3eir ,ounsel. ?n order /or me to determine relative 3ards3ip" ? must 3ave ,ompetent eviden,e submitted" not merel- an emotional appeal. 93e emotional strain t3at t3is tra6ed- 3as pla,ed upon t3e liti6ants is not alone su//i,ient /or me to order t3e in5un,tive relie/ pra-ed /or. +:,,ordin6l-" en,losed 3ere4it3 is a /orm 43i,3 must be ,ompleted b- ea,3 o/ t3e named plainti//s be/ore :pril 1" 19'(. #pon re,eivin6 and revie4in6 said data" it ma4ell be ,on,luded t3at t3ere is no i!!ediate /inan,ial ,risis on t3e part o/ t3e plainti//s" and t3at t3e- )or most o/ t3em* ,an a//ord to 4ait until trial /or a redress o/ t3eir 6rievan,es. :t least one o/ t3e de/endants is 4ell able to respond in dama6es and t3e likeli3ood o/ t3e plainti//s@ re,eivin6 a ver- siIable 5ud6ment 4it3in t3e neAt /e4 mont3s bears 3eavil- in t3eir /avor. +93e de/endants" ? believe" s3ould ,onsider o//erin6 some o/ t3eir abundant means to 3elp resolve t3is problem. 93e 3omes are no4 in t3e 3ands o/ a ver- ,ompetent person 43o 3as done a master/ul 5ob in stabiliIin6 and ,ontainin6 t3e problem. ?/ /unds 4ere made available to 3im&in t3e /orm o/ a loan or ot3er4ise&3e 4ould be in a position to undertake an advertisin6 and promotional pro6ram to /ill t3e eAistin6 va,an,ies. ?t mi63t be 4ell to remember t3e old ada6eF @C3arit- be6ins at 3ome.@ +? 3ave spoken 4it3 Mr. Matt3e4s to determine 3is availabilit- to meet 4it3 -ou 6entlemen at t3e ,on/eren,e table" and 3e is read-" 4illin6 and able to do so. $in,e @93e #nited Met3odist C3ur,3@ is @out o/ t3e ,ase@" per3aps Mr. Wit4er 4ould be

4illin6 to assume a position o/ /18 leaders3ip in brin6in6 t3e liti6ants to6et3er to ,on/er on,e more. Continued liti6ation ma- prove devastatin6 to all ,on,erned. 8er- trul- -ours" Joss C. 93arp2 93e Con/eren,e responded b- /ilin6 an ob5e,tion )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5* to >ud6e 93arp@s 3earin6 an- /urt3er matter. >ud6e 93arp ans4ered t3e ob5e,tion de,larin6 t3at 3e 3ad +evaluated t3e parties@ relative positions2 and +believe t3ere is a stron6 possibilit- t3at plainti//s 4ill prevail.2 He also stated" +? am not pre5udi,ed a6ainst an- part- to t3is liti6ation.2 93e Con/eren,e b- ,on,urrent motion sou63t to trans/er t3e underl-in6 a,tion /or pretrial matters as 4ell as trial to a sin6le 5ud6e. 93eir motion ,ontained t3ree named 5ud6es" a6reeable to all parties" to 43om t3e a,tion mi63t be trans/erred. 93e =residin6 >ud6e )Hr/ield* denied bot3 t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5 ob5e,tion to >ud6e 93arp and t3e motion to trans/er to a sin6le 5ud6e. 93ese 4rit pro,eedin6s /ollo4ed. =ropriet- o/ #se o/ Writ o/ Mandate =etitioners ,ontend t3at >ud6e Hr/ield@s denial o/ t3eir ob5e,tion to >ud6e 93arp is a pre5udi,ial abuse o/ dis,retion aut3oriIin6 relie/ b- pero6ative 4rit. 93e petition /or 4rit makes t3e appropriate alle6ations ,on,ernin6 t3e la,k o/ ade0uate remed- at la4 and /urt3er asserts t3at unless >ud6e 93arp is restrained" 3e 4ill pro,eed 4it3out or in eA,ess o/ 5urisdi,tion to 3ear and determine matters in t3e underl-in6 a,tion /rom 43i,3 3e is b- la4 dis0uali/ied. 93e propriet- o/" t3e ,onditions surroundin6" t3e use o/ t3e 4rit o/ mandate to revie4 a lo4er ,ourt order 4as /ull- ,onsidered b- t3is ,ourt in *ogya v. )uperior Court" '5 Cal.:pp.3d 122 ;142 Cal.Jptr. 325<. )1*We eAtra,t t3ere/rom t3ese essential rulesF +@;:< 4rit ;o/ mandate< 4ill lie 43en t3ere is no plain" speed-" and ade0uate alternative remed-7 t3e respondent 3as a dut- to per/orm7 and t3e petitioner 3as a ,lear and bene/i,ial ri63t to per/orman,e. ;Citations.<@ /1, +?t is t3e petitioner@s burden to establis3 t3e inade0ua,- o/ ot3er relie/. ;Citations.<2 )Id. at p. 12(.* Furt3er" it is a6reed as to most interim orders" +@t3e parties must be rele6ated to a revie4 o/ t3e order on appeal /rom t3e /inal 5ud6ment.@ ;Citations.<2 ) Id. at p. 129.* >ud6e Hr/ield@s order 3ere under revie4 is not dire,tl- appealable. )Code Civ. =ro,." M 904.1.*)2*Bor do 4e /ind" based on t3e parti,ular /a,ts )see Bescue Ar!y v. Municipal Court" 2( Cal.2d 4%0" 4%% ;1'1 =.2d (<* t3at appeal /rom /inal 5ud6ment is an ade0uate remed-. ?/ due to 5ural bias or pre5udi,e" real parties in interest are in /a,t 6ranted preliminar- relie/ andSor ,lass ,erti/i,ation" petitioners ma- be /or,ed to present a lon6 and eApensive de/ense to a suit 43i,3 mi63t not 3ave ,ontinued 3ad preliminar- relie/ and ,lass ,erti/i,ation not been 6ranted. =etitioners s3ould not be re0uired to pro,eed to trial 4it3out t3e bene/its a//orded b- an impartial" unbiased 5ud6e 3earin6 entire pretrial matters. 93e issue o/ 5ural bias" i/ le/t unresolved" ma- in/e,t t3e entire subse0uent pro,eedin6s 4it3 /atal error. 93is issue must be promptl- resolved. 93e burden" eApense and dela- involved in a trial o/ t3e ma6nitude and ,ompleAit- in prospe,t

render an appeal /rom an eventual 5ud6ment an inade0uate remed-. )3*Jespondent superior ,ourt ,ontends t3e Con/eren,e 3as an ade0uate remed- at la4&a +peremptor-2 ,3allen6e o/ >ud6e 93arp pursuant to Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0.%&and /or t3at reason relie/ b- eAtraordinar- 4rit s3ould be denied. 93e ar6ument la,ks merit. First" a se,tion 1'0.% motion is not available to petitioner. :s to t3e preliminarin5un,tion pro,eedin6s" su,3 a motion 4ould ,learl- be untimel-. +?/ t3e motion is dire,ted to a 3earin6 )ot3er t3an t3e trial o/ a ,ause*" t3e motion must be made not later t3an t3e ,ommen,ement o/ t3e 3earin6.2 )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.%.*93e 3earin6 on t3e preliminar- in5un,tion" t3ou63 not ,on,luded" 3as ,ommen,ed. Furt3ermore" peremptor- dis0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e 93arp on ot3er pretrial motions is pre,luded b- 3is parti,ipation in t3e preliminar- in5un,tion 3earin6. $e,tion 1'0.% provides +;t<3e /a,t t3at a 5ud6e ... 3as presided at or a,ted in ,onne,tion 4it3 a pretrial ,on/eren,e or ot3er 3earin6" pro,eedin6 or motion prior to trial and not involving a *80 deter!ination o' contested 'act issues relating to the !erits s3all not pre,lude t3e later makin6 o/ t3e motion. ...2 )?tali,s added.* D- ne6ative impli,ation" i/ a 5ud6e presides at or a,ts in ,onne,tion 4it3 a pretrial motion involvin6 a determination o/ ,ontested /a,t issues relatin6 to t3e merits" a later makin6 o/ a se,tion 1'0.% motion is pre,luded. 93e 3earin6 on t3e motion /or preliminar- in5un,tion" involvin6 as it does an assessment o/ t3e likeli3ood t3at plainti//s 4ould prevail at trial )see" e.6." Continental ?aking Co. v. >atC" %( Cal.2d 512" 52( ;%' Cal.Jptr. '%1" 439 =.2d ((9<*" re0uires a determination o/ su,3 issues and t3us pre,ludes a later se,tion 1'0.% motion. ?n s3ort" t3e remed- at la4 su66ested b- respondent ,ourt is simpl- not available. )5*Moreover" +?t is 4ell settled t3at !anda!us 4ill not lie to ,ontrol t3e dis,retion o/ a ,ourt or 5udi,ial o//i,er or to ,ompel its eAer,ise in a parti,ular manner" eA,ept in t3ose rare instan,es 43en under t3e /a,ts it ,an be le6all- eAer,ised in but one 4a-.2 )*il!er v. )uperior Court" 220 Cal. '1" '3 ;29 =.2d 1'5<.* 93is latter rule applies 43ere t3e /a,ts are undisputed and t3e lo4er ,ourt 3as arrived at an in,orre,t ,on,lusion o/ la4 based t3ereon or 3as disre6arded a duteApressl- en5oined b- t3e la4 under t3e undisputed /a,ts. Hnl- in su,3 /a,t settin6 ma- t3e 5udi,ial o//i,er be ,ompelled b- 4rit o/ mandate to a,t in a parti,ular manner. )Matter o' ord" 1%0 Cal. 334" 34' ;11% =. '5'<.* ?n )tate ar! etc. Ins. Co. v. )uperior Court" 4' Cal.2d 42( ;304 =.2d 13< )0uotin6 4it3 approval /rom ?erry v. Chaplin" '4 Cal.:pp.2d %%9" %'2 ;1%9 =.2d 442<*" 4e /ind t3is /urt3er enli63tenmentF +@?n a le6al sense" dis,retion is abused 43enever in t3e eAer,ise o/ its dis,retion t3e ,ourt eA,eeds t3e bounds o/ reason" all o/ t3e ,ir,umstan,es be/ore it bein6 ,onsidered.2@ )=. 432.* Wit3 t3is brie/ traverse o/ t3e prere0uisites to issuan,e o/ t3e 4rit" 4e eAamine t3e spe,i/i, 6rounds asserted. )%a*93e /a,ts are 4it3out ,on/li,t. >ud6e 93arp 4rote t3e letter o/ Mar,3 20 at a time 43en 3e 3ad pendin6 be/ore 3im t3ese unresolved matters&a motion /or preliminarin5un,tion" a ,lass ,erti/i,ation 0uestion and a demurrer. 93e pre,ise issue in t3e /rame4ork o/ ,on,eded /a,ts is 43et3er as a !atter o' law respondent ,ourt 4as re0uired to sustain t3e Con/eren,e@s Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision /82 5 ob5e,tion to >ud6e 93arp. )?riggs v. )uperior Court" 215 Cal. 33%" 342&345 ;10 =.2d 1003<.* Cali/ornia Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5 reads in pertinent partF +Bo 5usti,e or 5ud6e s3all sit or a,t as su,3 in an- a,tion or pro,eedin6F W3en

it is made to appear probable t3at" b- reason o/ bias or pre5udi,e o/ su,3 5usti,e or 5ud6e a /air and impartial trial ,annot be 3ad be/ore 3im.2 !is0uali/i,ation is re0uired b- t3is se,tion 43en it appears +probable2 b- reason o/ eviden,e o/ bias or pre5udi,e a +/air and impartial trial2 ,annot be 3ad be/ore t3e ,3allen6ed 5ud6e7 or in t3e ,onteAt o/ t3is pro,eedin6" 43et3er it is probable t3e Con/eren,e ,annot obtain a /air and impartial 3earin6 be/ore >ud6e 93arp on t3e ,ontinued 3earin6 o/ t3e preliminar- in5un,tion matter and t3e ot3er pretrial matters re0uirin6 resolution o/ disputed /a,tual issues b- 3im. 93e respondent ,ourt ,ontends +... even i/ >ud6e 93arp@s letter o/ Mar,3 20 ,ould be vie4ed as demonstratin6 an adverse opinion to Con/eren,e on t3is issue" it ,annot /orm t3e basis /or a /indin6 o/ bias or pre5udi,e sin,e t3e letter 4as based on 43at 3ad o,,urred be/ore >ud6e 93arp in t3e ,ourse o/ t3e underl-in6 liti6ation.2 ?t is ar6ued >ud6e 93arp@s statements 4ere in dis,3ar6e o/ 3is o//i,ial duties7 t3ere/ore 3is vie4s eApressed are not eviden,e o/ bias or pre5udi,e and ,annot be t3e basis /or dis0uali/i,ation. )>reling v. )uperior Court" 25 Cal.2d 305" 312 ;153 =.2d '34<.* Jespondent ,ourt asserts >ud6e 93arp@s 4ritten statement" +? believe t3e plainti//s@ ,laims a6ainst t3e =a,i/i, U $out34est Con/eren,e are meritorious and t3at t3e- 4ill in all probabilit- prevail at time o/ trial2 4as in /a,t a per/orman,e o/ t3e 5ud6e@s dut- to determine one o/ t3e issues in t3e pendin6 in5un,tion pro,eedin6sF to 4it" 43et3er +t3ere is a reasonable probabilit- t3at plainti//s 4ill be su,,ess/ul in t3e assertion o/ 3is ri63ts2 )Continental ?aking Co. v. >atC" %( Cal.2d 512" 52( ;%' Cal.Jptr. '%1" 439 =.2d ((9<*" or 4ould prevail on t3e merits )People v. Paci'ic Land Besearch Co." 20 Cal.3d 10" 21 ;141 Cal.Jptr. 20" 5%9 =.2d 125<.* ?n >reling v. )uperior Court" 25 Cal.2d 305" 312 ;153 =.2d '34<" t3e $upreme Court statedF +;W<3en t3e state o/ mind o/ t3e trial 5ud6e /83 appears to be adverse to one o/ t3e parties but is based upon a,tual observan,e o/ t3e 4itnesses and t3e eviden,e 6iven durin6 t3e trial o/ an a,tion" it does not amount to t3at pre5udi,e a6ainst a liti6ant 43i,3 dis0uali/ies 3im in t3e trial o/ t3e a,tion. ?t is 3is dut- to ,onsider and pass upon t3e eviden,e produ,ed be/ore 3im" and 43en t3e eviden,e is in ,on/li,t" to resolve t3at ,on/li,t in /avor o/ t3e part- 43ose eviden,e out4ei63s t3at o/ t3e opposin6 part-. 93e opinion t3us /ormed" 6eing the result o' a 7udicial hearing" does not amount to t3at bias and pre5udi,e ,ontemplated b- se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5" o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure...2 )?tali,s added.* ?n >reling" trial 5ud6e $tanle- Mosk eApressed t3e ,3allen6ed opinion onl- a/ter 3e 3ad 3eard all o/ t3e eviden,e in a parti,ular ,ase and t3e parties 3ad rested. 93e ,3allen6e made 4as to >ud6e Mosk@s 3earin6 t3ree additional ,ases set be/ore 3im but to trail and be tried at t3e ,on,lusion o/ t3e /irst ,ase. 93e eviden,e re,eived on t3e /irst trial 4as to be re,eived and ,onsidered in t3e remainin6 trials. Nrelin6 did not ,laim t3at t3e eviden,e re,eived in t3e /irst ,ase 4as not ,ompetent and relevant or inadmissible in t3e t3ree ,ases later to be tried7 nor did 3e ,laim 3e 3ad an/urt3er eviden,e on an- issue t3at 4ould ,3an6e t3e result rea,3ed b- >ud6e Mosk in t3e /irst ,ase. Clearl- t3e opinion /ormed b- >ud6e Mosk 4as t3e result o/ a /ull 3earin6 o/ eviden,e and at a time 43en 3e 3ad a le6al dut- to rule upon t3e matter submitted. Beit3er t3e /a,ts nor t3e rule announ,ed in >reling pur6e >ud6e 93arp@s remarks. #nlike >ud6e 93arp@s vie4s" t3e opinion o/ t3e 5ud6e in >reling 4as +t3e result o/ a 5udi,ial 3earin6.2 ?t 4as 6iven onl- a/ter +a,tual observan,e o/ t3e 4itnesses and t3e eviden,e 6iven durin6 t3e trial. ...2 :nd in *aldane v. *aldane" 232 Cal.:pp.2d 393" 395 ;42 Cal.Jptr. (2(<" t3e appellate

,ourt su,,in,tl- states t3e ruleF +@: 5ud6e ma- not properl- tr- a ,ase 43ere 3e 3as /ormed partisan opinions /rom outside sour,es" but a trial 5ud6e 4ill normall- and properl- /orm opinions on t3e la4" t3e eviden,e and t3e 4itnesses" /rom t3e presentation o/ t3e ,ase. 93ese opinions and eApressions t3ereo/ ma- be ,riti,al or dispara6in6 to one part-@s position" but t3e- are rea,3ed a/ter a 3earin6 in t3e per/orman,e o/ t3e 5udi,ial dut- to de,ide t3e ,ase" and do not ,onstitute a 6round /or dis0uali/i,ation.2@ )'*W3ere a 5ud6e 6ratuitousl- o//ers an opinion on a matter not -et pendin6 be/ore 3im and t3ereb- s3o4s a bias or pre5udi,e a6ainst a part-" a 4rit o/ mandate 4ill issue pre,ludin6 t3e opinin6 5ud6e /rom 3earin6 t3at matter. )Calhoun v. )uperior Court" 51 Cal.2d 25'" 2%1 ;331 =.2d %4(<.* )%b*#pon 5uAtaposition o/ t3e un,ontradi,ted /a,ts 4it3 t3e /ore6oin6 rules o/ la4" 4e /ind >ud6e 93arp@s letter" on its /a,e" rebuts an- su66estion 3e 4as addressin6 3is remarks re6ardin6 t3e Con/eren,e@s ultimate liabilit- to an issue involved in t3e pendin6 motion /or preliminar- in5un,tion. His vie4 o/ real part-@s ultimate su,,ess on t3e issues o/ liabilit- and dama6es a6ainst t3e Con/eren,e and CCF: are eApressed in t3e t3ird para6rap3 o/ t3e letter. ?t is not until t3e /ourt3 para6rap3 43ere t3e 5ud6e /irst re/ers to t3e pendin6 preliminar- in5un,tion appli,ation. He t3ere addresses it as an entirel- distin,t and separate sub5e,t. +$n the other hand" so /ar as plainti//s@ motion /or preliminar- relie/ is ,on,erned...2 )?tali,s added.* ?n t3e ,onteAt /ound and /rom t3e 4ords used" no ot3er ,on,lusion /ollo4s but t3at >ud6e 93arp@s opinion treated 4it3 a matter not be/ore 3im" to 4itF t3e Con/eren,e and CCF: liabilit- and t3e eAtent t3ereo/ on trial. Furt3ermore" >ud6e 93arp 4as but midpro,ess in t3e preliminar- in5un,tion matter. 93e eviden,e&takin6 aspe,t o/ t3at 3earin6 3ad not ended. Beit3er part- 3ad submitted t3e matter /or de,ision. 93us t3is midstream 6ratuitous blast 4as not o/ t3e 6enre o/ interim de,isions a trial ,ourt must make based upon t3e eviden,e t3en re,eived on a preliminar- 0uestion re0uirin6 ans4er be/ore t3e trial ,an pro,eed. /82 :ddin6 to t3e 3i63 de6ree o/ probabilit- t3at >ud6e 93arp 4as not addressin6 3is remarks to an issue be/ore 3im in dis,3ar6e o/ a le6al dut- is t3is si6ni/i,ant /a,tF >ud6e 93arp@s opinion as to ultimate responsibilit- en,ompasses not onl- t3e Con/eren,e but a part- not be/ore t3e ,ourt on t3e preliminar- in5un,tion matter&CCF:. CCF: 3ad entered a spe,ial appearan,e onl-" to ,ontest 5urisdi,tion" b- its motion to 0uas3 servi,e o/ summons. ?t 4as t3e rulin6 on CCF:@s motion t3at a,,ompanied >ud6e 93arp@s Mar,3 20 letter. CCF: 3as not ,on,eded 5urisdi,tion but rat3er 3as sin,e petitioned t3is ,ourt /or 4rit o/ mandate ,3allen6in6 >ud6e 93arp@s rulin6. CCF: ,ould not&4it3out 4aivin6 its 5urisdi,tional ,3allen6e&parti,ipate in t3e motion /or preliminar- in5un,tion in an- 4a-. ?/ >ud6e 93arp 4as eApressin6 onl- an opinion re0uired o/ 3im on a matter t3en pendin6 be/ore 3im" it seems utterl- in,on6ruous t3at 3e 4ould 3ave mentioned CCF: 4it3in t3e broad s4eep o/ 3is opinions on liabilit- and eAtent t3ereo/ on trial. ?/ it be assumed t3at embedded 4it3in >ud6e 93arp@s eApression as to ultimate liabilit- and eAtent t3ereo/ is a vie4 ,on,ernin6 t3e rulin6 be made on t3e preliminar- in5un,tion motion" t3en >ud6e 93arp 3as pre5ud6ed t3e matter be/ore 3im. De/ore ,ompletion o/ t3e eviden,e&takin6 pro,ess" be/ore ar6ument 3e 3as de,ided one o/ t3e issues ne,essaril- involved in 6rantin6 or not 6rantin6 a preliminarin5un,tion. Furt3er" >ud6e 93arp 4rote in 3is missive" + n,losed 3ere4it3 is a /orm 43i,3 must be ,ompleted b- ea,3 o/ t3e named plainti//s be/ore :pril 1" 19'(.2 D- t3is lan6ua6e >ud6e 93arp departed /rom 3is role o/ impartial arbiter and in5e,ted 3imsel/ into t3e

,ase as an advo,ate. He proposed 4it3out noti,e to ,ounsel" a /orm o/ /inan,ial 0uestionnaire intended to provide in/ormation to 3im upon 43i,3 3e 4ould de,ide t3e 0uestion o/ irreparable 3arm" an issue be/ore 3im in t3e preliminar- in5un,tion matter. 93e /orm atta,3ed and t3e lan6ua6e used b- t3e 5ud6e leads unerrin6l- to t3at ,on,lusion. Furt3er" >ud6e 93arp in sa-in6F +93e de/endants" ? believe" s3ould ,onsider o//erin6 some o/ t3eir abundant means to 3elp resolve t3is problem"2 and +? 3ave spoken 4it3 Mr. Matt3e4s to determine 3is availabilit- to meet 4it3 -ou 6entlemen at t3e ,on/eren,e table ..."2 and +Continued liti6ation ma- prove devastatin6 to all ,on,erned"2 is not rulin6 upon a matter be/ore 3im. Jat3er t3e vi,e o/ su,3 statements is t3at instead o/ maintainin6 3is /un,tion as a 5ud6e 3e a6ain be,omes an advo,ate in t3e ,ase. Certainl- 3is ob5e,tivit- i/ not alread- 6one" is t3e /86 neAt ,asualt-. 93ese statements vie4ed in toto indi,ate a pre5ud6ment o/ t3e entire ,ase" not 5ust t3e spe,i/i, matters -et unresolved be/ore 3im. Jepeated admonitions to +settle t3e ,ase2 settlement 4ill be in t3e best interest o/ t3e ,lient indi,ate t3at t3e 5ud6e ma- 3ave be,ome pre5udi,ed in t3e ,ase. )Bosen'ield v. &osper" 45 Cal.:pp.2d 3%5" 3'2 ;114 =.2d 29<.* W3ile a ,ourt ma-" a/ter re,eipt o/ eviden,e" 6ive ,ounsel an eApression o/ its ,on,lusions up to t3at moment in order t3at ,ounsel ma- be advised o/ 43at ,ourse to ,3art )"ardner v. Mo6il $il Co!pany" 21' Cal.:pp.2d 220" 22% ;31 Cal.Jptr. '31" % :.L.J.3d 1451<*" and to t3at eAtent en,oura6e settlement dis,ussions" /a,tuall- t3at is not t3is ,ase. >ud6e 93arp 4as midstream in pretrial matters. 93e use o/ t3e 0uoted lan6ua6e at t3is point in time is 3i63l- indi,ative t3at >ud6e 93arp 3as adopted a +mental attitude or disposition2 /or or a6ainst a partto t3e a,tion. 93e 3orses 4ere not -et out o/ t3e paddo,k -et t3e 4inner 4as ,3osen. Finall-" >ud6e 93arp@s publi, eApression o/ opinion as to not onl- t3e liabilit- o/ t3e Con/eren,e to t3e real parties but t3at t3e dama6es to be a4arded 4ould be +enormous2 presumes a ,lass a,tion 4ill be ,erti/ied. 93is ar6uabl- ,onstitutes a pre5ud6ment o/ one o/ t3e motions t3en pendin6 be/ore t3e ,ourt and upon 43i,3 t3e Con/eren,e 3as 3ad no opportunit- to respond or ,omment. We address t3is ke- 0uestionF Has >ud6e 93arp" as s3o4n b- t3e un,ontradi,ted eviden,e o/ publi,l- announ,ed pre5ud6ments o/ issues be/ore 3im as 4ell as issues and parties not be/ore 3im" b- un,3allen6ed eviden,e o/ t3e inter5e,tion o/ 3is vie4s and dire,tives indi,atin6 3is adoption o/ an advo,ate@s pose" demonstrated bias or pre5udi,e a6ainst a part- to t3e re0uisite de6ree o/ probabilit- under Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5O )(*Dias is de/ined as a mental predeli,tion or pre5udi,e7 a leanin6 o/ t3e mind7 +a predisposition to de,ide a ,ause or an issue in a ,ertain 4a-" 43i,3 does not leave t3e mind per/e,tl- open to ,onvi,tion.2 )Dla,k@s La4 !i,t." p. 205.* Dias or pre5udi,e ,onsists o/ a +mental attitude or disposition o/ t3e 5ud6e to4ards a part- to t3e liti6ation" ...2 )Evans v. )uperior Court" 10' Cal.:pp. 3'2" 3(0 ;290 =. %%2<.* ?n order /or t3e 5ud6e to be dis0uali/ied under Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5" t3e pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a parti,ular part-. )Evans v. )uperior Court" supra.People v. )weet" 19 Cal.:pp.2d 392" 39% ;%5 =.2d (99<.*/81 ?n de/inin6 bias" Adoption o' Bichardson" 251 Cal.:pp.2d 222 ;59 Cal.Jptr. 323< illustrates t3e ,on,eptF +Dias e0uates 3ere 4it3 partialit-. Here t3e 5ud6e 3ad a /iAed opinion o/ t3e un/itness o/ petitioners solel- be,ause t3e- 4ere dea/&mutes. He 4as under some in/luen,e 43i,3 so s4a-ed 3is mind in one dire,tion as to prevent 3is de,idin6 t3e ,ase a,,ordin6 to t3e eviden,e. 93is leanin6 or in,lination a6ainst all dea/&mutes 4it3out re6ard to t3eir ,3ara,ter" abilities and demonstrated /ine 0ualities is in,onsistent 4it3 a state o/ mind /ull- open to ,onvi,tion 43i,3 t3e eviden,e mi63t produ,e. Hne 43ose opinion is pre,on,eived and eApressed in 4ritin6 4it3 re/eren,e to parti,ular persons or situations is obviousl- in,lined to t3at vie4"

and ,onsiderable eviden,e 4ould ordinaril- be ne,essar- be/ore t3ose positiveleApressed impressions ,ould be removed and 3is mind restored to t3e strai63t line o/ impartialit-.2 )Id. at pp. 232.* Adoption o' Bichardson" supra." also de/ines t3e term pre5udi,e in t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5 ,onteAt in t3is mannerF +=re5udi,e imports t3e /ormation o/ a /iAed anti,ipator- 5ud6ment as ,ontradistin6uis3ed /rom t3ose opinions 43i,3 ma- -ield to substantial eviden,e. ?t in,ludes t3e /ormin6 o/ an opinion 4it3out due kno4led6e or eAamination" alt3ou63 it does not ne,essaril- indi,ate an- ill /eelin6.2 We ,annot see into t3e mind or 3eart o/ >ud6e 93arp. Ho4ever" t3e ob5e,tive eviden,e demonstrates&to a 3i63 de6ree o/ probabilit-&>ud6e 93arp 3as a +leanin6 o/ t3e mind"2 +a predisposition to de,ide t3e ... issue2 4it3 a mind state not +per/e,tlopen to ,onvi,tion.2 He 3as /ormed a +/iAed anti,ipator- 5ud6ment.2 He 3as pre5ud6ed t3e out,ome o/ t3e preliminar- ,ause be/ore 3im as 4ell as t3e trial not be/ore 3im. 9o an- member o/ t3e dis,ernin6 publi," it 4ould reasonabl- appear >ud6e 93arp 3ad pre5ud6ed 4it3out /a,t and 4it3out 3earin6 t3e ultimate out,ome o/ an enormous and ,ompleA ,ase. He appears to 3ave pre5ud6ed t3e out,ome o/ t3e spe,i/i, pretrial matter be/ore 3im lon6 be/ore an- 5ud6e is aut3oriIed to +tote up2 or to ,ommen,e 3is ,on,lusionar- t3inkin6. ?n so doin6" 3e 3as broken a prime 6round rule o/ t3e 5ud6e@s ,ra/t. +93e trial o/ a ,ase s3ould not onl- be /air in /a,t" but it /88 s3ould also appear to be /air. :nd 43ere t3e ,ontrar- appears" it s3o,ks t3e 5udi,ial instin,t to allo4 t3e 5ud6ment to stand.2 )Pratt v. Pratt" 141 Cal. 24'" 252 ;'4 =. '42<7 Wood v. City Civil )ervice Co!!ission" 45 Cal.:pp.3d 105" 110 ;119 Cal.Jptr. 1'5<.* 93e $upreme Court in )ol6erg v. )uperior Court" 19 Cal.3d 1(2" at pa6e 193" /ootnote 10 ;13' Cal.Jptr. 4%0" 5%1 =.2d 114(<" spoke to t3e 3eart o/ t3e matterF +@?t is o/ten stated t3at it is not onl- t3e 'act but t3e appearance o/ pre5udi,e t3at s3ould dis0uali/- a 5ud6e. 93is is a rule t3at appeals to t3e reason o/ t3e Constitution... ;?<t is not t3e /a,t o/ pre5udi,e t3at 4ould impair t3e le6itima,- o/ t3e 5udi,iar-@s role but rat3er t3e pro6a6le /a,t o/ pre5udi,e" i.e." t3e appearan,e o/ pre5udi,e. 93e trut3 o/ /e4" i/ an-" ultimate 2/a,ts+ o/ 3uman eAisten,e are establis3ed to t3at point o/ ,omplete ,ertitude 43i,3 eliminates all plausible doubt. : /a,t as di//i,ult o/ as,ertainment as an- person@s 2pre5udi,e+ is seldom" i/ ever" proven so ,ompletelt3at reasonable persons mi63t not still disa6ree. :nd t3e mere alle6ation or 6ood /ait3 belie/ t3at a /a,t is true ma- be su//i,ient to ,ause reasonable doubt. $in,e t3e le6itima,- o/ t3e Court@s role is essentiall- a per,eption o/ t3e people" in 43ose se,ure ,on/iden,e t3e ,ourts must remain i/ t3eir po4ers are to be maintained" it /ollo4s t3at merel- probable or even alle6ed /a,ts or a 6ood /ait3 belie/ in su,3 /a,ts ma- be su//i,ient to dis0uali/- a 5ud6e.2@ We ,an but sa- :men. )%,*We ,on,lude >ud6e Hr/ield@s denial o/ t3e Con/eren,e@s Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5" ob5e,tion to >ud6e 93arp 4as an abuse o/ dis,retion. #nder t3at statute t3e bias and pre5udi,e so demonstrated dis0uali/ies >ud6e 93arp /rom /urt3er 3earin6" /urt3er rulin6 on an- matter related to t3e underl-in6 a,tion. Furt3er t3e bias taints" t3e dis0uali/i,ation eAtends" not onl- to matters in prospe,t but also to t3e entire pro,eedin6&t3e preliminar- in5un,tion&t3en in pro,ess be/ore >ud6e 93arp. ?n ,on/ormit- 4it3 t3e vie4s 3ere eApressed" let t3e 4rit o/ mandate issue.

93e sentimental interest o/ a 5ud6e" or an interest in /a,ts 43i,3 t3e issues re0uire 3im to determine" t3at ma- tend to indu,e 3im to 6ive more 4ei63t to t3e eviden,e /or one part- t3an to t3at o/ t3e ot3er" ma- tend to s3o4 bias or pre5udi,e and dis0uali/- 3im upon t3at 6round. Lassen ?rri6ation Co. v. $uperior Court o/ Lassen Count- )190'* 151 Cal 35'" 90 = '09" 190' Cal L P?$ 431. LL?nsu//i,ient 6rounds /or 5ud6e@s dis0uali/i,ation /or bias and pre5udi,e 4ere s3o4n 43ere a//idavit alle6ed t3at 5ud6e" in 43oll- di//erent prior a,tion" denied ,ontinuan,e re0uested b- de/endant but made no alle6ation as to s3o4in6 made on motion /or su,3 ,ontinuan,e" t3at 5ud6e" in earlier trial" branded de/endant as liti6ious person but did not s3o4 t3at ad5e,tive 4as ina,,urate" and t3at 5ud6e in previous a,tion Rt3ou63t o/R re/errin6 de/endant to distri,t attorne- /or per5ur- and stated t3at R3e intended to eAamine t3e re,ord 4it3 a vie4 toR su,3 re/eren,e" but /urt3er alle6ed t3at 5ud6e told de/endant in ,3ambers t3at 3e re6retted 3is an6er in open ,ourt and 3ad de,ided not to re/er matter to distri,t attorne- /or per5ur-. 9alia/erro v. 9alia/erro )19%2" Cal :pp 1st !ist* 203 Cal :pp 2d %42" 21 Cal Jptr (%4" 19%2 Cal :pp L P?$ 240'. Dias and pre5udi,e 4ere s3o4n in a pro,eedin6 /or a 4rit o/ pro3ibition to prevent a ,3allen6ed 5ud6e /rom pro,eedin6 4it3 a ,ontempt 3earin6" 43ere none o/ t3e /a,ts 4ere in dispute" and t3e onl- reasonable ,on,lusion to be dra4n /rom 4ords used b- t3e ,3allen6ed 5ud6e at t3e 3earin6 upon 3is dis0uali/i,ation 4as t3at 3e meant to ,3ar6e and did ,3ar6e t3e petitioners 4it3 3avin6 kno4in6l- made /alse statements in t3eir a//idavit o/ dis0uali/i,ation. Dri66s v. $uperior Court o/ Los :n6eles Count- )1932* 215 Cal 33%" 10 =2d 1003" 1932 Cal L P?$ 419. Beit3er bankrupt,- 5ud6e1s re/eren,e to 5udi,ial mis,ondu,t ,omplaint /iled a6ainst 3im b- putative debtor1s ,3ie/ /inan,ial o//i,er )CFH*" solel- /or purpose o/ indi,atin6 t3at statements made b- t3e CFH in ,omplaint undermined 3is ,redibilit-" nor 5ud6e@s allusion to possibilit- t3at debtor@s prin,ipals ma- 3ave impeded dis,over- and improperl- disbursed debtor1s assets" 4ould 3ave ,aused reasonable person 4it3 kno4led6e o/ all t3e /a,ts to ,on,lude t3at 5ud6e1s impartialit- mi63t reasonabl- be 0uestioned" as re0uired /or statements to provide basis /or 5ud6e@s re,usal based on appearan,e o/ partialit-. ?n re Fo,us Media" ?n,." C.:.9 )Cal.*2004" 3'( F.3d 91%" ,ertiorari denied 125 $.Ct. 1'42" 544 #.$. 9%(" 1%1 L. d.2d %1%" re3earin6 denied " re3earin6 denied 125 $.Ct. 2515" 544 #.$. 10%(" 1%1 L. d.2d 1125. >ud6es 49)2* !is0uali/i,ation ma- be ne,essar- 43ere t3e senten,e o/ t3e ori6inal 5ud6e indi,ates an animus in,onsistent 4it3 5udi,ial ob5e,tivit- and it ma- also be ,alled /or 43ere t3e 5ud6e@s /ailure to /ollo4 t3e senten,in6 rules su66ests a 43imsi,al disre6ard o/ t3e senten,in6 s,3eme t3at is in,ompatible 4it3 a 5udi,ial e//ort to ,ompl- 4it3 its ,ompleA terms7 but mere senten,in6 error" 6iven t3e ,ompleAit- o/ t3e determinate senten,in6 s,3eme" does not 5usti/- removin6 t3e trial 5ud6e. =era,,3i v. $uperior Court )2003* 135 Cal.Jptr.2d %39" 30 Cal.4t3 1245" '0 =.3d 1054" re3earin6 denied. Criminal La4 1192
+eo.le v. EnriC$e=, 160 Cal.(...4th 230, 12 Cal.:.tr.3d 118, 08 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 2066, 2008 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 226, %Cal.(... 3 -ist., 7e* 20, 2008)

LL)4* 5ud6e@s ,omments 6ave rise to reasonable doubt about 43et3er 5ud6e ,ould be impartial.

Jeversed 4it3 dire,tions. ;11< Cri6inal La8 110 11,2

110 Criminal La4 110PP?8 Jevie4 110PP?8)#* !etermination and !isposition o/ Cause 110k1192 k. Mandate and =ro,eedin6s in Lo4er Court. Most Cited Cases Comments o/ trial 5ud6e" 43ose revo,ation o/ de/endant@s probation 4as reversed on anot3er 6round" 6ave rise to reasonable doubt about 43et3er 3e ,ould be impartial" and t3us 5ud6e ,ould not 3ear ,ase on remand7 5ud6e said 3e 3ated =roposition 3% probation" 43i,3 6enerall- allo4ed returns to probation /or nonviolent dru6&related o//enses a/ter /irst and se,ond petitions /or revo,ation" and 5ud6e eApressed animosit- to4ard t3ose like de/endant 43o /ailed to ,omplete =roposition 3% probation 4it3out a violation. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1)a*)%*):*)iii*7 West@s :nn.Cal.=enal Code M 1210.1 )200%*. ;12< J$d!es 221 4,%1)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k49 Dias and =re5udi,e 22'k49)1* k. ?n Ceneral. Most Cited Cases ?/ a reasonable man 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1)a*)%*):*)iii*. ;11<;12< Hne issue remains. !e/endant asserts t3at be,ause >ud6e Ma,Farland +denoun,ed =roposition 3% and persons enrolled in it2 and b- 3is ,omments demonstrated bias a6ainst de/endant" t3e ,ase must be remanded to t3e trial ,ourt and 3eard be/ore a di//erent 5ud6e. De,ause 4e 3ave determined t3e 5ud6ment must be reversed and t3e ,ase remanded due to t3e ,ourt@s improper disposition o/ 43at must be deemed a sin6le petition /or revo,ation o/ de/endant@s probation" 4e need not de,ide 43et3er >ud6e Ma,Farland@s ,omments alone 4ould 5usti/- reversal and remand. ?t is ,lear to us" 3o4ever" t3at 6iven 3is unabas3ed animosit- to4ard =roposition 3%" and parti,ularlto4ard t3ose de/endants&like t3e one 3ere&43o are unable to ,omplete =roposition 3% probation 4it3out a violation" >ud6e Ma,Farland ,annot be permitted to ,ondu,t /urt3er 3earin6s in t3is ,ase on remand. +;?</ a reasonable man 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated.2 )(nited ar! Workers o' A!erica v. )uperior Court )19(5* 1'0 Cal.:pp.3d 9'" 104" 21% Cal.Jptr. 47 see also Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1" subd. )a*)%*):*)iii*.* >ud6e Ma,Farland@s ,omments 6ive rise to a reasonable doubt about 43et3er 3e ,an be impartial in t3is ,ase. 93ere/ore" on remand" 3e s3all not ,ondu,t an- /urt3er pro,eedin6s in t3is ,ase. /242 !?$=H$?9?HB 93e 5ud6ment is reversed" and t3e ,ase is remanded /or /urt3er pro,eedin6s ,onsistent 4it3 t3is opinion be/ore a di//erent 5ud6e. We ,on,urF !:8?$" :,tin6 =.>." and MHJJ?$HB" >. Christie v. Cit3 o0 El Centro, 132 Cal.(...4th 161, 31 Cal.:.tr.3d 118, 06 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 411, 2006 &ac5!ro$ndD :rrestee sued ,it-" poli,e department" and individual o//i,ers /or /alse arrest and 4ron6/ul imprisonment. :rrestee /iled peremptor- ,3allen6e to /irst 5ud6e"

se,ond 5ud6e 6ranted de/endants nonsuit" and t3ird 5ud6e 6ranted arrestee@s ,3allen6e /or ,ause to se,ond 5ud6e. ?n 3earin6 be/ore ne4 5ud6e" t3e $uperior Court" ?mperial Count-" Bo. L0055'" !onal D. !onnell-" >." 6ranted arrestee ne4 trial. !e/endants appealed. #oldin!sD 93e Court o/ :ppeal" Bares" >." 3eld t3atF )1* de/endants@ /ailure to /ile 4rit petition" ,3allen6in6 rulin6 t3at se,ond 5ud6e 4as dis0uali/ied" barred appellate revie4 o/ t3at rulin67 )2* order 6rantin6 nonsuit b- dis0uali/ied se,ond 5ud6e 4as void 4it3out s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e7 )3* se,ond 5ud6e 4as dis0uali/ied 43en 3e ,ommuni,ated 4it3 /irst 5ud6e7 and )4* even t3ou63 not re0uired" arrestee s3o4ed pre5udi,e. ://irmed. West Headnotes ;1< Manda6$s 4%1) 250k4)1* Most Cited Cases Cit-@s /ailure to /ile petition /or 4rit o/ mandate" ,3allen6in6 rulin6 t3at 5ud6e 4as dis0uali/ied /rom arrestee@s /alse arrest a,tion /or ,ommuni,atin6 4it3 ori6inal 5ud6e 43om arrestee 3ad ,3allen6ed peremptoril-" barred appellate revie4 o/ dis0uali/i,ation rulin6 in appeal /rom ultimate order 6rantin6 arrestee ne4 trial. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.3)d*. ;2< J$d!es 26 22'k5% Most Cited Cases Hrder 6rantin6 nonsuit in arrestee@s /alse arrest a,tion a6ainst ,it- and poli,e" b5ud6e 43o 4as dis0uali/ied /or ,ommuni,atin6 4it3 ori6inal 5ud6e 43om arrestee 3ad ,3allen6ed peremptoril-" 4as void 4it3out s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e" even t3ou63 /a,ts 6ivin6 rise to dis0uali/i,ation 4ere not kno4n until a/ter t3e rulin6 on nonsuit motion. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M M 1'0.1" 1'0.3. )ee , Witkin% Cal. Procedure 2+th ed. 3--04 Courts% D -, et seE.5 Wegner et al.% Cal. Practice "uide; Civil #rials and Evidence 2#he Butter "roup ,11.4 F 9;89 et seE. 2CACI&E& Ch. 9-A45 Cal. Jur. 9d% Judges% D 0. et seE. ;3< J$d!es 4,%1) 22'k49)1* Most Cited Cases 93e standard /or dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e /or an- doubts as to impartialit- is /undamentall- an ob5e,tive one and not limited to a,tual bias. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1)a*)%*. ;4< J$d!es 4,%1) 22'k49)1* Most Cited Cases !is0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e is mandated i/ a reasonable person 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1)a*)%*. ;2< J$d!es 3, 22'k39 Most Cited Cases $e,ond 5ud6e in arrestee@s /alse arrest a,tion a6ainst ,it- and poli,e 4as dis0uali/ied 43en 3e ,ommuni,ated 4it3 ori6inal 5ud6e 43om arrestee 3ad ,3allen6ed peremptoril-" not at later time 43en t3ird 5ud6e /ormall- de,lared 3im dis0uali/ied a/ter 3earin6. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M M 1'0.1" 1'0.3. ;6< J$d!es 3, 22'k39 Most Cited Cases !is0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e o,,urs 43en t3e /a,ts ,reatin6 dis0uali/i,ation arise" not 43en dis0uali/i,ation is establis3ed. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1.

;1< J$d!6ent 318 22(k3'( Most Cited Cases Jelie/ /rom 5ud6ment entered b- dis0uali/ied 5ud6e is available to a part- 43o" 4it3 due dili6en,e" dis,overs t3e 6rounds /or dis0uali/i,ation onl- a/ter 5ud6ment is entered or appeal /iled. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1. ;8< J$d!es 21%2) 22'k51)2* Most Cited Cases :lt3ou63 a part- 3as an obli6ation to a,t dili6entl-" 3e or s3e is not re0uired to laun,3 a sear,3 to dis,over dis0uali/-in6 in/ormation t3at a 5ud6e s3ould 3ave dis,losed. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 1'0.1. ;,< J$d!6ent 1,1 22(k19' Most Cited Cases $tatute providin6 t3at a dismissal order a,ts as a /inal 5ud6ment in t3e a,tion /or all purposes applies to dismissal orders /ollo4in6 t3e 6rant o/ a motion /or nonsuit. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M 5(1d. ;10< J$d!es 26 22'k5% Most Cited Cases Hrders o/ dis0uali/ied 5ud6es are void and must be va,ated. :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M M 1'0.1" 1'0.3.

West@s

;11< (..eal and Error 1046.2 30k104%.5 Most Cited Cases W3ere a part- is denied a /air 3earin6 be,ause o/ t3e mis,ondu,t o/ t3e ,ourt" t3e matter is reversible per se. ;12< 'e8 ?rial 21 2'5k2' Most Cited Cases LL:rrestee s3o4ed pre5udi,e" entitlin6 3im to ne4 trial in 3is /alse arrest a,tion a6ainst ,it- and poli,e" in entr- o/ order o/ nonsuit b- 5ud6e 43o 4as dis0uali/ied /or 3avin6 ,ommuni,ated 4it3 ori6inal 5ud6e 43om arrestee 3ad ,3allen6ed peremptoril-7 ,onversation 4as improper and 6ave rise to a doubt as to 43et3er 5ud6e 4ould be impartial in rulin6 on t3e motion /or nonsuit. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. M M 1'0.1" 1'0.3" 1'0.%. B:J $" >. /16, ?n t3is a,tion /or /alse arrest and 4ron6/ul imprisonment brou63t b- Den C3arles C3ristie" t3e ,ourt set aside a nonsuit and dismissal in /avor o/ t3e Cit- o/ l Centro" t3e l Centro =oli,e !epartment" and l Centro =oli,e H//i,ers Ja- Donillas and /ran Coronel ),olle,tivel-" t3e Cit-*. 93e ,ourt 6ranted a ne4 trial /or Rirre6ularit- o/ t3e pro,eedin6sR be,ause t3e 5ud6e 43o 6ranted nonsuit" t3e Honorable Darrett Foerster" 3ad dis,ussed t3e ,ase 4it3 a previousl- dis0uali/ied 5ud6e" t3e Honorable >e//re- >ones. 93e ,ourt /ound >ud6e Foerster dis0uali/ied to rule on t3e nonsuit motion as a result o/ t3e dis,ussion" and t3e resultin6 dismissal 4as set aside as void. //120 /110 Hn appeal" t3e Cit- asserts )1* t3ere 4as no le6al or /a,tual basis /or 6rantin6 t3e motion /or ne4 trial based upon irre6ularit- in t3e pro,eedin6s" and )2* t3ere 4as no s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e or denial o/ a /air trial to C3ristie su//i,ient to support a ne4 trial. We ,on,lude t3at )1* be,ause >ud6e Foerster 4as dis0uali/ied at t3e time 3e 6ranted t3e Cit-@s motion /or nonsuit" t3at rulin6 4as void and must be va,ated re6ardless o/

a s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e7 and )2* even i/ a s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e or denial o/ a /air trial 4ere ne,essar-" t3at s3o4in6 3as been met b- C3ristie. :,,ordin6l-" 4e a//irm t3e order 6rantin6 a ne4 trial and remand t3e matter /or a ne4 trial on C3ristie@s ,laims. F:C9#:L :B! =JHC !#J:L D:CNCJH#B! ;FB1<

FB1. De,ause t3is is an appeal /rom a 6rant o/ ne4 trial" and 4e do not 3ave t3e trans,ripts /rom t3e underl-in6 trial" mu,3 o/ t3e /a,tual ba,k6round 3as been taken /rom t3e statement o/ /a,ts in C3ristie@s motion /or ne4 trial. Ho4ever" 4e 3ave not in,luded an- /a,ts disputed b- t3e Cit-. :. acts (nderlying ChristieGs Clai!

Hn Bovember 23" 1999" $tep3anie HernandeI" t3e 4i/e o/ an l Centro poli,e o//i,er" stopped 3er pi,kup tru,k in a lane o/ travel in t3e parkin6 lot at a Cost,o in l Centro" Cali/ornia. HernandeI 4as 4aitin6 /or t3e ,losest parkin6 spa,e to t3e store in t3at ro4 to be,ome available. C3ristie entered t3e same lane. He stopped 3is tru,k be3ind t4o smaller ,ars t3at 4ere 4aitin6 be3ind HernandeI@s pi,kup. W3ile 3e 4as 4aitin6" t3e t4o smaller ve3i,les bet4een 3imsel/ and HernandeI passed 3er ve3i,le to t3e ri63t. C3ristie asserts t3at 3e t3en tried to drive 3is ve3i,le around HernandeI@s ve3i,le on t3e ri63t side and at t3at point 3is tru,k sli63tl- ,onta,ted 3er bumper on t3e ri63t side. He also ,ontends t3at t3e impa,t 4as so sli63t t3at 3er ve3i,le did not move and no dama6e resulted to eit3er ve3i,le. C3ristie t3en 3onked 3is 3orn to tr- to 6et 3er to move" but HernandeI remained stopped in /ront o/ 3im. He eAited 3is tru,k and 4ent up to 3er ve3i,le to re0uest 3er to move. Ho4ever" s3e rolled up 3er 4indo4s up" turned 3er ba,k to 3im and be6an talkin6 on 3er ,ell p3one. C3ristie 4ent ba,k to 3is ,ar and 4aited" alon6 4it3 ot3er ve3i,les be3ind 3im" until a ,ouple ,ame out o/ t3e store 4it3 t3eir 6ro,eries" loaded t3em into t3e ve3i,le parked in t3e /irst spa,e and le/t. HernandeI pulled into t3e va,ated spa,e and parked. :,,ordin6 to C3ristie" 3e 4aited ,lose to 20 minutes be/ore t3e /irst spa,e opened up and HernandeI parked 3er ve3i,le. C3ristie t3en pro,eeded to t3e tire s3op to 3ave a tire /iAed and 4ent into t3e Cost,o to do some s3oppin6. ?n t3e meantime" HernandeI ,alled t3e l Centro =oli,e !epartment. $3e identi/ied 3ersel/ as R352s:"R s3ort3and /or poli,e o//i,er Bo. 352@s 4i/e. $3e /111 also 6ave poli,e a des,ription o/ C3ristie@s ve3i,le" its ,olors" and its li,ense plate number" des,ribed 43ere it 4as parked" and indi,ated 43ere s3e 4ould be 4aitin6 /or t3em. HernandeI told poli,e t3at C3ristie 3ad rammed 3er ,ar several times 4it3 in,reasin6 /or,e. :,,ordin6 to HernandeI" C3ristie t3en approa,3ed 3er ve3i,le in a t3reatenin6 manner" and s3e 4as a/raid /or 3ersel/ as 4ell as t3e sa/et- o/ 3er ,3ildren and nie,e and nep3e4" 43o 4ere also in t3e tru,k. H//i,ers Coronel and Donillas arrived at t3e s,ene and took 3er statement" 43i,3 a6ain related t3e rammin6 in,ident and 3er /ear. W3en H//i,ers Coronel and Donillas arrived at t3e Cost,o" C3ristie 4as inside //121 s3oppin6" and HernandeI 4as 4aitin6 outside. :s C3ristie 4as s3oppin6" 3e 4as approa,3ed b- H//i,er Donillas 43o told 3im 3e needed to talk to 3im about t3e in,ident 43ere 3e Rrammed a 4oman t3ree times.R C3ristie told H//i,er Donillas t3at t3ere 3ad been no rammin6 and t3at 3e 3ad onl- a,,identall- ,onta,ted HernandeI@s bumper on,e" and t3ere 4as no dama6e to 3er ve3i,le. H//i,er Donillas t3en es,orted C3ristie out o/ t3e store. C3ristie 4at,3ed as t3e poli,e o//i,ers ,onversed 4it3 HernandeI in $panis3. :,,ordin6 to HernandeI" s3e told t3e o//i,ers t3at 3er tru,k 4as at /irst tapped bC3ristie as 3e tried to 6et around 3er. Ho4ever" 3e t3en ba,ked up dire,tl- be3ind 3er and rammed 3er tru,k 3ard t3ree times 4it3 3is tru,k. HernandeI ,laimed t3at t3e

/or,e o/ t3e impa,ts 4ere so stron6 t3at t3e- made 3er ve3i,le ro,k and s3e /eared /or 3er li/e and t3e lives o/ 3er passen6ers. Mr. :rmistead" a passen6er in C3ristie@s ve3i,le" 4as intervie4ed b- H//i,er Donillas. He told H//i,er Donillas t3at t3e ve3i,les@ bumpers tou,3ed onl- on,e and it 4as a,,idental. He also ,on/irmed t3at HernandeI 3ad blo,ked t3e lane o/ travel and t3e- 3ad been unable to pass 3er. Dot3 HernandeI@s and C3ristie@s tru,ks 3ad ,3rome bumpers t3at 4ere in per/e,t ,ondition be/ore t3e in,ident. H//i,er Donillas eAamined HernandeI@s ve3i,le and ,laimed 3e /ound an area 43ere dust 3ad been disturbed. He took p3oto6rap3s o/ t3e bumper. H//i,er Donillas also intervie4ed anot3er passen6er in C3ristie@s ,ar" DobbCamp. H//i,er Coronel prepared a poli,e report o/ t3e in,ident" 43erein 3e stated t3at C3ristie and 3is passen6ers 3ad all ,on/essed to C3ristie@s purpose/ull- strikin6 HernandeI@s ve3i,le. H//i,er Coronel intervie4ed t3e 10&-ear&old nie,e and 14&-ear& old nep3e4 o/ HernandeI" 43o 4ere passen6ers in 3er ve3i,le. Ho4ever" a,,ordin6 to C3ristie" none o/ t3eir statements 4ere re,orded in t3e poli,e report. :,,ordin6 to C3ristie" bot3 o/ t3ese 4itnesses stated 43en intervie4ed t3at t3e- did not see" /eel or 3ear an-one rammin6 HernandeI@s ve3i,le. /112 C3ristie 4as arrested and taken to 5ail. He 4as strip sear,3ed" and remained in 5ail /or siA da-s. :,,ordin6 to C3ristie" be,ause o/ 3is in,ar,eration" 3e 4as unable to attend t3e planned 6rand openin6 o/ 3is restaurant in $an Felipe" Da5a Cali/ornia" on 93anks6ivin6 !a-. D. #he Cri!inal #rial :t C3ristie@s arrai6nment" 3e 4as o//ered a plea bar6ain to redu,e t3e ,3ar6es to disturbin6 t3e pea,e" a misdemeanor. C3ristie re/used t3e plea o//er and 4ent to trial on ,3ar6es o/ assault 4it3 a deadl- 4eapon" assault" and re,kless drivin6. :t trial" H//i,er Coronel testi/ied t3at t3e prose,utor sent 3im to intervie4 t3e t4o 4itness passen6ers in HernandeI@s ve3i,le. He ,ondu,ted t3e intervie4 but never 6ave a report to t3e prose,utor. 93e pi,tures poli,e took o/ HernandeI@s bumper 4ere not produ,ed at trial. H//i,ers Coronel and Donilla testi/ied at trial t3at C3ristie and 3is passen6er :rmistead bot3 admitted t3at C3ristie 3ad intentionall- stru,k HernandeI@s ve3i,le. H//i,er Donillas testi/ied t3at 3e 3ad lo,ated disturbed dust in t3e ,enter o/ HernandeI@s bumper. :/ter presentation o/ t3e eviden,e" t3e 5ur- deliberated /or approAimatel- one 3our" and t3en a,0uitted C3ristie o/ all ,3ar6es. C. #he Civil )uit and #rial ?n Bovember 2000 C3ristie /iled t3is a,tion a6ainst t3e Cit-" assertin6 ,auses o/ a,tion /or assault and batter-" /alse arrest" /alse imprisonment" mali,ious prose,ution" violation o/ ,ivil ri63ts" ,onspira,-" ne6li6en,e" //122 and in/li,tion o/ emotional distress" and 3is 4i/e >oan /iled a ,laim /or loss o/ ,onsortium. Hn Bovember 22" 2000" C3ristie /iled a peremptor- ,3allen6e to t3e /irst 5ud6e assi6ned to t3e matter" >ud6e >ones. 93e matter 4ent to trial be/ore LL>ud6e Foerster in Mar,3 2004. :t t3e ,on,lusion o/ t3e presentation o/ eviden,e in t3e ,ase" >ud6e Foerster 6ranted t3e Cit-@s motion /or nonsuit" /indin6 t3at HernandeI@s report to poli,e provided probable ,ause /or t3e arrest" t3ereb- barrin6 all o/ C3ristie@s ,auses o/ a,tion as a matter o/ la4. Hn :pril '" 2004" t3e ,ourt /iled a /ormal order dismissin6 C3ristie@s a,tion 4it3 pre5udi,e.

!. #he Motion 'or =ew #rial Hn :pril 2%" 2004" C3ristie /iled a motion /or ne4 trial" assertin6 t3at t3e ,ourt erred in 6rantin6 t3e motion /or nonsuit be,ause 3is eviden,e" vie4ed in its most /avorable li63t" demonstrated )1* a prima /a,ie ,ase o/ a violation o/ 3is /ederal ,onstitutional ri63ts7 )2* t3e Cit- 3ad not met its burden o/ /113 provin6 probable ,ause7 and )3* 3e 4as entitled to a 5ur- trial on 3is mali,ious prose,ution ,laim even i/ t3e o//i,ers 3ad probable ,ause /or t3e initial arrest. 93e 3earin6 on t3e motion /or ne4 trial 4as 3eld on Ma- 1'" 2004. !urin6 t3e 3earin6 on t3e ne4 trial motion" ,ounsel /or C3ristie told >ud6e Foerster t3at 3e 4as in/ormed and believed t3at >ud6e Foerster 3ad ,onsulted 4it3 >ud6e >ones prior to 6rantin6 t3e motion /or nonsuit and t3at C3ristie 3ad previousl- /iled a peremptor- ,3allen6e a6ainst >ud6e >ones. Counsel ar6ued t3at i/ t3at o,,urred" t3e motion /or ne4 trial s3ould be 6ranted on t3at basis as 4ell. 93e ,ourt did not respond to t3is in/ormation on t3e re,ord. Ho4ever" a/ter takin6 t3e motion /or ne4 trial under submission" >ud6e Foerster issued a 4ritten dis,losure 43erein 3e a,kno4led6ed t3at >ud6e >ones 3ad been dis0uali/ied and t3at 3e 3ad spoken 4it3 3im ,on,ernin6 Rt3e la4 and pro,edures t3at mi63t be appli,able to ;t3e< matter.R He /urt3er stated t3at 3e 4as not a4are o/ t3e dis0uali/i,ation 43en 3e spoke to >ud6e >ones" and neit3er 4as >ud6e >ones. >ud6e Foerster also stated" R>ud6e >ones did not advise me as to 3o4 t3is ,ase s3ould be de,ided. ?n arrivin6 at m- de,ision in 6rantin6 t3e motion /or nonsuit" ? relied on m- o4n le6al resear,3 and anal-sis. 93ere/ore" m- re,usal is not ne,essar- or appropriate.R Hn t3at same date" >ud6e >ones sent a letter to ,ounsel ,on/irmin6 t3e ,onversation 4it3 >ud6e Foerster and statin6 t3at 3e did not indi,ate to >ud6e Foerster 3o4 3e s3ould rule on t3e motion /or nonsuit. He also dis,losed a se,ond ,onversation 4it3 >ud6e Foerster be/ore t3e 3earin6 on t3e motion /or ne4 trial. :,,ordin6 to >ud6e >ones" t3e onl- sub5e,t dis,ussed at t3at meetin6 4as s,3edulin6 a ,ourt reporter to ,over t3e motion /or ne4 trial due to a s3orta6e o/ ,ourt reporters at t3e l Centro ,ourt3ouse. >ud6e Foerster sent a letter to ,ounsel t3e neAt da- indi,atin6 t3at >ud6e >ones@s re,olle,tions ,on,ernin6 t3e sub5e,t matter o/ t3eir ,onversations 4ere R6enerall- ,onsistent 4it3 m- o4n.R . Challenge 'or Cause C3ristie /iled a ,3allen6e /or ,ause a6ainst >ud6e Foerster. C3ristie stated in t3e ,3allen6e t3at t3e ,ommuni,ation bet4een >ud6e Foerster and >ud6e >ones ,on,ernin6 t3e ,ase 4as inappropriate be,ause o/ >ud6e >ones@s previous dis0uali/i,ation and be,ause it immediatel- pre,eded and ,on,erned t3e pendin6 motion /or nonsuit. C3ristie asserted t3at >ud6e Foerster 4as dis0uali/ied as o/ t3e time o/ t3e /irst ,ommuni,ation 4it3 >ud6e >ones //123 and also t3at 3e 4as biased a6ainst C3ristie@s ,ase. ?n response to t3e ,3allen6e" >ud6e Foerster /iled an ans4er re,itin6 t3e ,onta,ts 4it3 >ud6e >ones and a6ain assertin6 t3at >ud6e >ones 3ad not /114 opined as to 3o4 3e s3ould rule on t3e matter. He also indi,ated t3at 3is /irst ,onversation 4it3 >ud6e >ones o,,urred immediatel- prior to 3is 6rant o/ t3e motion /or nonsuit. F. Buling on Challenge 'or Cause 93e ,3allen6e /or ,ause 4as assi6ned b- t3e >udi,ial Coun,il to t3e Honorable C3ristop3er >. Warner" a 5ud6e o/ t3e superior ,ourt o/ $an Dernardino Count-. >ud6e Warner issued a 4ritten order" /indin6 t3at >ud6e Foerster 4as dis0uali/ied in t3e matter. >ud6e Warner /irst /ound t3at t3e alle6ations o/ a,tual bias 4ere

unsupported and amounted to not3in6 more t3an C3ristie@s disa6reement 4it3 >ud6e Foerster@s rulin6s in t3e matter. LLHo4ever" >ud6e Warner /ound t3at >ud6e Foerster 4as dis0uali/ied be,ause o/ 3is ,ommuni,ations 4it3 >ud6e >ones" under Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0.%" subdivision )%*)C* ;FB2< be,ause Ra person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts mi63t reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to be impartial.R LL>ud6e Warner /ound t3at >ud6e Foerster 4as ,3ar6ed 4it3 kno4led6e o/ t3e previous dis0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e >ones be,ause it 4as in t3e ,ourt /ile and t3at" be,ause o/ t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e >ones" t3e ,onsultations ,reated an Rappearan,e o/ impropriet-.R >ud6e Warner stated" R93e appearan,e o/ impropriet- is patent. : 5ud6e s3ould simpl- not speak 4it3 anot3er 5ud6e about a ,ase in 43i,3 t3e latter 3as been dis0uali/ied. $u,3 ,ondu,t" no matter 3o4 inno,ent and 4ell intentioned" ,an onl- undermine publi, ,on/iden,e in t3e inte6rit- and impartialit- o/ t3e 5udi,iar-.R >ud6e Warner did not /ind an- Rmali,e or evil motive asso,iated 4it3 t3e ,onta,ts bet4een t3e t4o 5ud6es" but rat3er t3at t3e ,ommuni,ations 4ere t3e result o/ un/ortunate error in /ailin6 to be a4are o/ t3e previousl- /iled ;peremptor-< ,3allen6e.R LLBevert3eless" >ud6e Warner /ound t3at Ra reasonable person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts 4ould entertain a doubt as to t3e propriet- o/ >ud6e Foerster@s a,tions in ,ommuni,atin6 4it3 >ud6e >ones and mi63t reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at >ud6e Foerster 4ould be able to be impartial....R FB2. :ll /urt3er statutor- re/eren,es are to t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. >ud6e Warner also 6ave noti,e to t3e parties t3at t3e 0uestion o/ dis0uali/i,ation 4as not an appealable order and t3at it ,ould be revie4ed onl- b- a petition /or 4rit o/ mandate 4it3in 10 da-s o/ noti,e to t3e parties o/ t3e de,ision. 93e Cit- did not /ile a petition /or 4rit o/ mandate ,3allen6in6 t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e Foerster. C. *earing on Motion 'or =ew #rial ?e'ore =ew Judge Follo4in6 t3e dis0uali/i,ation order" t3e ,ase 4as reassi6ned to >ud6e !onnell- /or a 3earin6 on C3ristie@s motion /or ne4 trial" no4 based upon /112 bot3 an alle6ed error o/ la4" and irre6ularit- in t3e pro,eedin6s based upon t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e Foerster at t3e time 3e 6ranted t3e Cit-@s motion /or nonsuit. 93e ,ourt 6ranted C3ristie@s motion /or ne4 trial based upon Rirre6ularit- in t3e pro,eedin6s o/ t3e ,ourt.R >ud6e !onnell- /ound t3at >ud6e Warner 3ad /ound a violation o/ ,anon 2):* o/ t3e Cali/ornia Code o/ >udi,ial t3i,s in orderin6 >ud6e Foerster dis0uali/ied" and t3at su,3 violations R3ave been 3eld to ,onstitute pre5udi,ial irre6ularit- in t3e pro,eedin6s.R laboratin6" >ud6e !onnell- statedF R?n e//e,t" a dis0uali/ied 5ud6e made a dispositive rulin6 //124 a6ainst t3e plainti//. 93at alone is an irre6ularit- 5usti/-in6 a ne4 trial. 93e plainti// also ,3allen6es t3e /airness o/ ;t3e< 3earin6. >ust as t3e appearan,e o/ impropriet- 3as been /ound to be patent7 un/ortunatel-" t3e taint o/ an appearan,e o/ un/airness is palpable. #nder t3ese ,ir,umstan,es" t3ere are reasonable 6rounds to ,on,lude t3at t3e dis0uali/-in6 ,ommuni,ations bet4een 5ud6es" and t3e resultin6 appearan,e o/ impropriet-" did materiall- and pre5udi,iall- a//e,t t3e plainti//@s ri63t to a /air and impartial 3earin6 and trial. ;V < 93e plainti//@s motion /or ne4 trial on t3e 6round o/ irre6ularit- in t3e pro,eedin6s is 6ranted in /ull. 93e ,ourt denies plainti//@s motion /or ne4 trial on t3e 6round o/ error o/ la4 relatin6 to t3e @probable ,ause@ issue in t3e motion /or nonsuit.R 93is timel- appeal /ollo4s. !?$C#$$?HB :. CityGs Challenge to AisEuali'ication $rder ;1< ?n support o/ t3eir appeal assertin6 t3e ,ourt erred in 6rantin6 a ne4 trial"

t3e Cit- ,3allen6es t3e /indin6 b- >ud6e Warner t3at t3ere 4as an Rappearan,e o/ impropriet-R su//i,ient to render >ud6e Foerster dis0uali/ied. LLHo4ever" R93e determination o/ t3e 0uestion o/ t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e is not an appealable order and ma- be revie4ed onl- b- a 4rit o/ mandate /rom t3e appropriate ,ourt o/ appeal sou63t 4it3in 10 da-s o/ noti,e to t3e parties o/ t3e de,ision and onl- b- t3e parties to t3e pro,eedin6.R )M 1'0.3" subd. )d*.* 93is applies to bot3 motions 6rantin6 and den-in6 a motion to dis0uali/-" and to bot3 peremptor- ,3allen6es and ,3allen6es /or ,ause. )In re )heila ?. )1993* 19 Cal.:pp.4t3 1('" 194&195" 23 Cal.Jptr.2d 4(2.* ?t is undisputed t3at t3e Cit- did not /ile a petition /or 4rit o/ mandate 4it3 t3is ,ourt and t3ere/ore t3e ,ontention t3at >ud6e Warner did not 3ave ade0uate 6rounds to /ind t3at t3ere 4as an appearan,e o/ impropriet- 5usti/-in6 t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e Foerster is not revie4able on appeal. /116 D. E''ect o' AisEuali'ication on "rant o' =onsuit and Ais!issal ;2< 93e Cit- ,ontends t3at >ud6e !onnell- erred in 6rantin6 a ne4 trial be,ause t3ere 4as no a,tual pre5udi,e or a denial o/ a /air trial as a result o/ >ud6e Foerster@s a,tions. We ,on,lude t3at be,ause >ud6e Foerster 4as dis0uali/ied at t3e time 3e 6ranted t3e Cit-@s motion /or nonsuit" t3at rulin6 4as null and void and must be va,ated re6ardless o/ a s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e. We /urt3er ,on,lude t3at even i/ a s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e or denial o/ a /air trial 4ere ne,essar-" t3at s3o4in6 3as been met. LL:s >ud6e Warner /ound" >ud6e Foerster@s ,onversation about t3e Cit-@s motion /or nonsuit 4it3 >ud6e >ones" 43o 3ad previousl- been dis0uali/ied in t3e matter" immediatel- prior to >ud6e Foerster@s rulin6 on t3at motion" 6ave rise to a doubt as to 43et3er >ud6e Foerster 4ould be impartial in rulin6 on t3e motion. $e,tion 1'0.1" subdivision )a*)%* )se,tion 1'0.1)a*)%** provides in partF R)a* : 5ud6e s3all be dis0uali/ied i/ an- one or more o/ t3e /ollo4in6 is trueF ;V < ... ;V < )%* For an- reason ):* t3e 5ud6e believes 3is or 3er re,usal 4ould /urt3er t3e interests o/ 5usti,e" )D* t3e 5ud6e believes t3ere is a substantial doubt as to 3is or 3er ,apa,it- to be impartial" or )C* a person aware o' the 'acts !ight reasona6ly entertain a dou6t that the 7udge would 6e a6le to 6e i!partial. R )?tali,s added.* ;3<;4< 93e standard /or dis0uali/i,ation is /undamentall- an ob5e,tive one and not limited to a,tual bias. //122)(nited ar! Workers o' A!erica v. )uperior Court )19(5* 1'0 Cal.:pp.3d 9'" 104" 21% Cal.Jptr. 4.* !is0uali/i,ation is mandated i/ a reasonable person 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-. )I6id.* A,ept in ver- limited ,ir,umstan,es not appli,able 3ere" a dis0uali/ied 5ud6e 3as no po4er to a,t in an- pro,eedin6s a/ter 3is or 3er dis0uali/i,ation. )M 1'0.4.* ;5<;%<;'<;(< 93e Cit- asserts t3at t3e 6rant o/ nonsuit need not be overturned be,ause >ud6e Foerster 4as not dis0uali/ied until later" 43en >ud6e Warner 6ranted C3ristie@s motion to dis0uali/-. Ho4ever" dis0uali/i,ation o,,urs 43en t3e /a,ts ,reatin6 dis0uali/i,ation arise" not 43en dis0uali/i,ation is establis3ed. )#atu! v. )outhern Paci'ic Co. )19%'* 250 Cal.:pp.2d 40" 43" 5( Cal.Jptr. 23( )#atu! *7 see also (rias v. *arris ar!s% Inc. )1991* 234 Cal.:pp.3d 415" 422&42'" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %59 )(rias *.* 93e a,ts o/ a 5ud6e sub5e,t to dis0uali/i,ation are void or" a,,ordin6 to some aut3orities" voidable. )"io!etti v. Etienne )1934* 219 Cal. %('" %((&%(9" 2( =.2d 913 )"io!etti *7 (rias% supra% 234 Cal.:pp.3d at p. 424" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %597 ?etC v. Pankow )1993* 1% Cal.:pp.4t3 931" 939&940" 20 Cal.Jptr.2d (41 )?etC *.* Jelie/ is available to a part- 43o" 4it3 due dili6en,e" dis,overs t3e 6rounds /or dis0uali/i,ation onl- a/ter 5ud6ment is entered or appeal /iled. )(rias% supra% 234 Cal.:pp.3d at pp. 424&425" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %597 ?etC% supra% 1% Cal.:pp.4t3

at p. 940" 20 Cal.Jptr.2d (41.* :lt3ou63 a part- 3as an /111 obli6ation to a,t dili6entl-" 3e or s3e is not re0uired to laun,3 a sear,3 to dis,over in/ormation t3at a 5udi,ial o//i,er s3ould 3ave dis,losed. )(rias% supra% 234 Cal.:pp.3d at p. 425" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %59 ;part- not re0uired to investi6ate to as,ertain a 5ud6e@s /ormer ,lients<7 ?etC% supra% 1% Cal.:pp.4t3 at pp. 935" 93'" 20 Cal.Jptr.2d (41 ;parties not re0uired to investi6ate to as,ertain ,lients o/ la4 /irm in 43i,3 arbitrator 3ad been a partner<.* 93us" in "io!etti% supra% 219 Cal. at pa6es %((&%(9" 2( =.2d 913" de,ided under t3e /ormer dis0uali/i,ation statutes" a Cali/ornia $upreme Court order 6rantin6 revie4 o/ a ,ase 4as ,onsidered void be,ause one o/ t3e 5usti,es 43o si6ned it did not realiIe 3is relative represented t3e petitioner. :s t3e "io!etti ,ourt eAplained" it is t3e 'act o/ dis0uali/i,ation t3at ,ontrols" not subse0uent 5udi,ial a,tion on t3at dis0uali/i,ation. )Id. at p. %(9" 2( =.2d 913.* ?n (rias% supra% 234 Cal.:pp.3d 415" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %59" a 5ud6e 43o apparentl- did not kno4 3is /ormer la4 /irm represented t3e de/endant in an a,tion over 43i,3 3e presided 4as later deemed to 3ave been dis0uali/ied 43en 3e entered summar- 5ud6ment /or t3at de/endant. )Id. at p. 423" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %59.* 93e 5ud6ment 3e entered 4as ,onsidered ine//e,tive and 4as sub5e,t to atta,k b- t3e plainti//" even a/ter t3e a,tion 3ad ,on,luded. )Id. at pp. 423&424" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %59.* $imilarl-" in #atu!% supra% 250 Cal.:pp.2d 40" 5( Cal.Jptr. 23(" also de,ided under t3e prior dis0uali/i,ation statutes" a 5ud6e 43o /or6ot t3at a trust port/olio 3e oversa4 ,ontained t3e sto,k o/ a de/endant appearin6 be/ore 3im 4as nevert3eless ,onsidered dis0uali/ied and 4it3out aut3orit- to a,t" makin6 3is prior rulin6s in t3e a,tion void. )Id. at p. 42" 5( Cal.Jptr. 23(.* De,ause an order rendered b- a dis0uali/ied 5ud6e is null and void" it 4ill be set aside 4it3out determinin6 i/ t3e order 4as meritorious. )$ee id. at p. 43" 5( Cal.Jptr. 23( ;re5e,tin6 ,laim t3at trial 4as error /ree and t3ere/ore no pre5udi,e 4as s3o4nF R;?<t is no ans4er to sa- t3at t3e 5ud6ment 4as ,orre,t be,ause t3e statute does not sa- t3at t3e 5ud6e is dis0uali/ied to de,ide erroneousl- but t3at 3e s3all not de,ide at allR<7 McCauley v. )uperior Court )19%1* 190 Cal.:pp.2d 5%2" 5%5" 12 Cal.Jptr. 119 ;a,t o/ dis0uali/ied 5ud6e in 3oldin6 preliminar- //126 3earin6 and 3oldin6 de/endant over /or trial 4as void and set aside" even t3ou63 eviden,e a6ainst t3e de/endant R4as substantial"R and it 4as ar6ued t3at Ran- ot3er 5usti,e ... 4ould 3ave done t3e same t3in6R<.* ;FB3< FB3. !e/endants assert t3at McCauley 3as been overruled b- People v. Po!pa$rtiC )19(0* 2' Cal.3d 519" 529" 1%5 Cal.Jptr. (51" %12 =.2d 941" 43i,3 3eld t3at Rirre6ularities in t3e preliminar- eAamination pro,edures 43i,3 are not 5urisdi,tional in t3e /undamental sense s3all be revie4ed under t3e appropriate standard o/ pre5udi,ial error and s3all re0uire reversal onl- i/ de/endant ,an s3o4 t3at 3e 4as deprived o/ a /air trial or ot3er4ise su//ered pre5udi,e as a result o/ t3e error at t3e preliminar- eAamination. 93e ri63t to relie/ 4it3out an- s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e 4ill be limited to pretrial ,3allen6es o/ irre6ularities.R Po!pa-$rtiC is distin6uis3able. :s dis,ussed above" on,e a 5ud6e is dis0uali/ied" 3e or s3e is deprived o/ t3e 'unda!ental 7urisdiction to 3ear and rule on an- /urt3er matters. Moreover" t3e dis0uali/i,ation motion 4as not brou63t a/ter a /air and error /ree trial t3at ,ured an- pre5udi,e. /118 Courts /rom ot3er 5urisdi,tions also 3old t3at a dis0uali/ied 5ud6e is 4it3out po4er to render an- de,ision" and an- rulin6s made a/ter t3e dis0uali/i,ation are void and must be va,ated" 4it3out re6ard to t3e merits o/ t3e de,ision. )$ee" e.6." People v. Aistrict Court )19''* 192 Colo. 503" 5%0 =.2d (2(" (33 ;93e 5ud6e erred in not 6rantin6 a motion to dis0uali/-" and at t3at time lost 5urisdi,tion to a,t. R?t /ollo4s t3at t3e respondent 5ud6e 3ad no 5urisdi,tion to de,ide t3e de/endants@ motion to dismiss ... and 4e 3ave no 5urisdi,tion to ,onsider 43et3er or not 3e 4as ,orre,t in dismissin6 t3at ,aseR<7 ?olt v. )!ith )Fla.!ist.Ct.:pp.1992* 594 $o.2d (%4

;RFlorida ,ase la4 is 4ell settled t3at on,e a trial 5ud6e 3as re,used 3imsel/" /urt3er orders o/ t3e re,used 5ud6e are void and 3ave no e//e,tR<7 ?utler v. ?iven )o'tware% Inc. )199%* 222 Ca.:pp. ((" 4'3 $. .2d 1%(" 1'0 ;RD- t3e nature o/ ;t3e 5ud6e@s< re,usal" an- a,tions /ollo4in6 3is re,usal or a/ter 3e s3ould 3ave re,used 3imsel/ are naturall- voidR<7 &acura v. *aarGs EEuip!ent% Inc. )Minn.19(5* 3%4 B.W.2d 3('" 393 ;R;:</ter a 5ud6e 3as removed 3imsel/ /rom a ,ase" 3e ma- not issue an order 43i,3 relates to t3e meritsR<7 )tate e: rel. Johnson v. Mehan )Mo.Ct.:pp.19('* '31 $.W.2d (('" ((( ;RHn,e a ,3an6e o/ 5ud6e 3as been entered and t3e ,ase trans/erred to anot3er 5ud6e t3e dis0uali/ied 5ud6e 3as no /urt3er aut3oritin t3e ,ase and an- orders made a/ter t3e dis0uali/i,ation are voidR<7 ?laisdell v. City o' Bochester )1992* 135 B.H. 5(9" %09 :.2d 3((" 391 ;voidin6 all subse0uent rulin6s t3at 4ere based on /indin6s b- a 5ud6e 43o s3ould 3ave been dis0uali/ied<7 Estate o' Bisovi )B.!.19((* 429 B.W.2d 404" 40' ;3oldin6 t3at t3e orders si6ned bt3e 5ud6e a/ter 3e 4as dis0uali/ied are void<7 )tate v. =ossa!an )19(3* %3 Hr.:pp. '(9" %%% =.2d 1351" 1355 ;R: 5ud6ment entered b- a 5ud6e 43o 3as been dis0uali/ied in t3e manner pres,ribed in t3e statute is voidR<7 Aegar!o v. )tate )9eA.Ct.:pp.199%* 922 $.W.2d 25%" 2%( ;R?/ a 5ud6e is dis0uali/ied under t3e ,onstitution" 3e is absolutel- 4it3out 5urisdi,tion in t3e ,ase" and an- 5ud6ment rendered b- 3im is void and sub5e,t to ,ollateral atta,kR<.* Jel-in6 on se,tion 1'0.3" subdivision )b*)4*" t3e Cit- asserts t3at be,ause t3e /a,ts 6ivin6 rise to t3e dis0uali/i,ation 4ere not kno4n until a/ter t3e rulin6 on t3e motion /or nonsuit" t3at order ma- stand. LL93is ,ontention is unavailin6. Former $e,tion 1'0.3" subdivision )b*)4* providesF R?n t3e event t3at 6rounds /or dis0uali/i,ation are /irst learned o/ or arise a'ter the 7udge has !ade one or !ore rulings in a proceeding 6ut 6e'ore the 7udge has co!pleted 7udicial action in a proceeding% t3e 5ud6e s3all" unless t3e dis0uali/i,ation be 4aived" dis0uali/3imsel/ //121 or 3ersel/" but in t3e absen,e o/ 6ood ,ause t3e rulin6s 3e or s3e 3as made up to t3at time s3all not be set aside b- t3e 5ud6e 43o repla,es t3e dis0uali/ied 5ud6e.R )?tali,s added.* /11, 93e de,ision in (rias% supra% 234 Cal.:pp.3d 415" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %59 is a6ain instru,tive. 93e Court o/ :ppeal in (rias /ound t3at a 5ud6e 43o 6ranted summar5ud6ment /or a de/endant t3at 3ad been represented b- t3e 5ud6e@s /ormer la4 /irm 4as dis0uali/ied /rom presidin6 in t3e ,ase. Ho4ever" b- t3e time t3e dis0uali/-in6 /a,tors 4ere dis,overed" a 5ud6ment 3ad alread- been entered on t3e 5ud6e@s summar5ud6ment order. 93us" b- its terms" se,tion 1'0.3" subdivision )b*)4* did not 6overn" as t3e 5ud6e 3ad ,ompleted 5udi,ial a,tion in t3e ,ase. )(rias% supra% 234 Cal.:pp.3d at p. 423" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %59.* 93e (rias ,ourt 3eld t3at t3e 5ud6e@s summar- 5ud6ment order 4as voidable. )Id. at pp. 423&424" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %59.* ;9< $imilarl- in our ,ase" b- t3e time t3e /a,ts 6ivin6 rise to t3e nonsuit 4ere dis,overed" t3e ,ourt 3ad 6ranted a nonsuit and dismissed t3e a,tion. 93e Citattempts to distin6uis3 (rias b- notin6 t3at in t3at ,ase a 5ud6ment 3ad been entered" 43ile in t3is a,tion" onl- an order o/ dismissal 4as /iled. 93us" t3eassert" at t3e time t3e dis0uali/-in6 events 4ere dis,overed or kno4n" t3e 5ud6e 3ad not R,ompleted 5udi,ial a,tionR in t3e ,ase. 93is ,ontention is unavailin6. #nder se,tion 5(1d" a dismissal order a,ts as a /inal 5ud6ment in t3e a,tionF R:ll dismissals ordered b- t3e ,ourt s3all be in t3e /orm o/ a 4ritten order si6ned b- t3e ,ourt and /iled in t3e a,tion and t3ose orders 43en so /iled shall constitute 7udg!ents and 6e e''ective 'or all purposes% and t3e ,lerk s3all note t3ose 5ud6ments in t3e re6ister o/ a,tions in t3e ,ase.R )?tali,s added.* 93at se,tion applies to dismissal orders /ollo4in6 t3e 6rant o/ a motion /or nonsuit. )$ee PalaCCi v. Air Cargo #er!inals% Inc. )19%%* 244 Cal.:pp.2d 190" 192" 52 Cal.Jptr. (1'.* 93us" as in (rias% t3e 5ud6e 3ad ,ompleted 5udi,ial a,tion in t3e ,ase and t3e nonsuit order 4as void.

;10< :s dis,ussed" ante% t3e Cali/ornia $upreme Court and some Courts o/ :ppeal 3ave 3eld t3at t3e orders o/ dis0uali/ied 5ud6es are void and must be va,ated. )$ee "io!etti% supra% 219 Cal. at p. %(9" 2( =.2d 9137 Hies!er v. )uperior Court )2003* 10' Cal.:pp.4t3 3%0" 3%3&3%4" 132 Cal.Jptr.2d 1307 Hilog% Inc. v. )uperior Court )2001* (% Cal.:pp.4t3 1309" 1323" 104 Cal.Jptr.2d 1'37 In re Jenkins )1999* '0 Cal.:pp.4t3 11%2" 11%5&11%'" (3 Cal.Jptr.2d 2327 In re Jose ). )19'(* '( Cal.:pp.3d %19" %2(" 144 Cal.Jptr. 309.* :lt3ou63 t3e Cali/ornia $upreme Court 3as never re,onsidered its 3oldin6 in "io!etti% some Courts o/ :ppeal 3ave ,on,luded t3at su,3 orders are voidable" meanin6 t3e- onl- must be va,ated i/ t3e issue is properl- raised b- a part- in t3e trial ,ourt" be,ause t3e superior ,ourt itsel/" i/ not t3e dis0uali/ied 5ud6e" retains /undamental sub5e,t matter 5urisdi,tion. )?etC% supra% 1% Cal.:pp.4t3 at pp. 939&940" 20 Cal.Jptr.2d (417 see also People v. ?arrera )1999* '0 Cal.:pp.4t3 541" 549&551" (2 Cal.Jptr.2d '557 (rias% supra% 234 Cal.:pp.3d at pp. 423&424" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %597 In re Christian J. )19(4* 155 Cal.:pp.3d 2'%" 2'9&2(0" 202 Cal.Jptr. 54.* Witkin 3as anal-Ied t3e issue and ,on,ludes t3at su,3 orders are voidable" not voidF RLittle is a,,omplis3ed b- ,allin6 t3e 5ud6ment o/ a dis0uali/ied 5ud6e @void.@ ... 93e real 0uestion&&t3e e//e,t o/ t3e 5ud6ment&&is evaded b- t3e loose appli,ation o/ t3is 4ord o/ man- meanin6s. 93e problem is one o/ /180 5urisdi,tion and" despite t3e /a,t t3at a dis0uali/ied 5ud6e totall- la,ks po4er to 3ear and determine t3e ,ause" t3e de/e,t s3ould not be ,onsidered a la,k o/ 5urisdi,tion o/ t3e sub5e,t //128 matter.... ;V < ... ;?<t is onl- t3e parti,ular 5ud6e 43o is dis0uali/ied7 t3e ,ourt is not. :not3er 5ud6e o/ t3e same ,ourt" or a 5ud6e assi6ned /rom anot3er ,ourt" ma- tr- t3e ,ase.R )2 Witkin" Cal. =ro,edure )4t3 ed. 199%* Courts" M 93" p. 131.* #nder Auto EEuity )ales% Inc. v. )uperior Court )19%2* 5' Cal.2d 450" 455" 20 Cal.Jptr. 321" 3%9 =.2d 93'" 4e /ollo4 t3e $upreme Court@s dire,tion on t3is issue and ,on,lude t3at t3e order 6rantin6 nonsuit is void and must be set aside. Furt3er" even i/ our 3i63 ,ourt 4ere to re,onsider t3e issue" 3oldin6 t3at t3e order is onl- voidable" t3e result 4ould be t3e same. 93e di//eren,e bet4een a void 5ud6ment and a voidable one is t3at a part- seekin6 to set aside a voidable 5ud6ment or order must a,t to set aside t3e order or 5ud6ment be/ore t3e matter be,omes /inal. )(rias% supra% 234 Cal.:pp.3d at pp. 424&425" 2(5 Cal.Jptr. %597 ?etC% supra% 1% Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 940" 20 Cal.Jptr.2d (41.* ?t is undisputed t3at C3ristie timelmoved to set aside t3e dismissal be/ore t3e matter be,ame /inal. 93us" 43et3er void or voidable" t3e order must be va,ated. 93e order and dismissal are a nullit- be,ause >ud6e Foerster a,ted 4it3out 5urisdi,tion in 6rantin6 t3e motion be,ause 3e 4as deemed dis0uali/ied to a,t in t3e matter as o/ t3e time o/ 3is ,onversation 4it3 >ud6e >ones pre,edin6 3is rulin6 on t3e nonsuit motion. ?n support o/ its ,ontention t3at t3e ,ourt@s 6rant o/ nonsuit must be reversed" t3e Cit- points out t3at se,tion %5' re0uires a s3o4in6 on a motion /or ne4 trial based upon irre6ularit- in t3e pro,eedin6s t3at t3e a,tions o/ t3e 5ud6e materiall- a//e,ted t3e substantial ri63ts o/ a part- and prevented t3e part- /rom 3avin6 a /air trialF R93e verdi,t ma- be va,ated and an- ot3er de,ision ma- be modi/ied or va,ated" in 43ole or in part" and a ne4 or /urt3er trial 6ranted on all or part o/ t3e issues" on t3e appli,ation o/ t3e part- a66rieved" /or an- o/ t3e /ollo4in6 ,auses" !aterially a''ecting the su6stantial rights o' such party; ;V < 1. ?rre6ularit- in t3e pro,eedin6s o/ t3e ,ourt" 5ur- or adverse part-" or an- order o/ t3e ,ourt or abuse o/ dis,retion 6y which either party was prevented /rom 3avin6 a /air trial. )?tali,s added.* ;11< LLHo4ever" be,ause >ud6e Foerster la,ked t3e po4er to rule on de/endants@ motion /or nonsuit" 3is a,tion in pro,eedin6 4it3 t3e 3earin6 on t3e motion ,onstituted a denial o/ a /air 3earin6. )2 Witkin" Cal. =ro,edure" supra%

>urisdi,tion" M M 293&294" p. (%4.* LLW3ere a part- is denied a /air 3earin6 be,ause o/ t3e mis,ondu,t o/ t3e ,ourt" t3e matter is reversible per se. )9 Witkin" Cal. =ro,edure" supra% :ppeal" M 449" p. 49'7 ewel v. ewel )1943* 23 Cal.2d 431" 433" 144 =.2d 592.* ;12< /181 Furt3er" even i/ a s3o4in6 o/ a,tual pre5udi,e or denial o/ a /air trial 4ere re0uired" C3ristie meets bot3 re0uirements. ?n ar6uin6 t3at t3ere 4as no pre5udi,e" t3e Cit- asserts t3at t3e eviden,e s3o4ed t3at t3e a,tual ,ommuni,ation bet4een >ud6e Foerster and >ud6e >ones 4as inno,ent and 3armless. Ho4ever" as 4e dis,ussed above" sin,e no 4rit o/ mandate 4as /iled ,3allen6in6 >ud6e Warner@s ,on,lusion t3at Ra reasonable person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts 4ould entertain a doubt as to t3e propriet- o/ >ud6e Foerster@s a,tions in ,ommuni,atin6 4it3 >ud6e >ones and mi63t reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at >ud6e Foerster 4ould be able to be impartial ...R" t3at /indin6 is bindin6 upon us. De,ause >ud6e >ones" unbekno4nst to eit3er 3im or >ud6e Foerster" 4as dis0uali/ied at t3e time t3e- spoke o/ t3e Cit-@s motion /or nonsuit" t3e ,onversation 4as improper" and 6ave rise to a doubt as to 43et3er >ud6e Foerster 4ould be impartial in rulin6 on t3e motion /or //12, nonsuit. 93is is a su//i,ient s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e to a//irm a 6rant o/ ne4 trial. &ri!!s v. S$.erior Co$rt, 81 Cal.(...4th 312, 104 Cal.:.tr.2d 442, 01 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 1638, 2001

bad ,ase
:oit= v. Cold8ell &an5er :esidential &ro5era!e Co., 62 Cal.(...4th 116, 13 Cal.:.tr.2d 82, ,8 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 2201, ,8 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 3048 %Cal.(... 2 -ist., Mar 26, 1,,8)

bad ,ase
Ensher, (leEander " &arsoo6, Inc. v. Ensher, 222 Cal.(...2d 318, 31 Cal.:.tr. 321 %Cal.(... 3 -ist. Mar 02, 1,64)

instru,tive but bad ,ase

H :!BH9 $

%1a, 1*) >ud6es M 4%)1*&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias and =re5udi,e. W3ere a statement o/ dis0uali/i,ation o/ a trial 5ud6e /or bias or pre5udi,e s3o4ed" at most" t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be unable to ,ontinue 4it3 t3e ,ase on remittitur i/ /urt3er matters 4ould be len6t3- be,ause o/ 3is appointment as administrator o/ a state a6en,-" t3e 5ud6e properl- stru,k t3e statement /rom t3e /iles as it /ailed to alle6e /a,ts s3o4in6 bias and pre5udi,e. $ee Cal.J$r.2d, >ud6es" M 417 (6.J$r., >ud6es )rev ed M 1%9*. %2) >ud6es M 4%)1*&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias and =re5udi,e. Dias or pre5udi,e ,onsists o/ a mental attitude or disposition o/ t3e 5ud6e to4ard a part- to t3e liti6ation. %3) >ud6es M 4%)%*&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias and =re5udi,e. For a 5ud6e to be dis0uali/ied /or bias or pre5udi,e" t3e pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a parti,ular part- and be su//i,ient to impair t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit- so t3at it appears probable t3at a /air trial ,annot be 3eld. )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5.* %4) >ud6es M 55.1&&!is0uali/i,ation&&=ro,eedin6s&&:ns4er o/ >ud6e. #nder Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" i/ a 4ritten statement settin6 /ort3 t3e /a,ts ,onstitutin6 alle6ed bias or pre5udi,e o/ a 5ud6e is timel- and states su//i,ient /a,ts" it is t3e dut- o/ t3e 5ud6e to /ile an ans4er 4it3in /ive da-s or be dis0uali/ied /rom sittin6 until t3e matter o/ 3is bias is passed on b- anot3er 5ud6e7

43ere" 3o4ever" t3e statement is le6all- insu//i,ient" t3e 5ud6e ma- i6nore it or strike it /rom t3e /iles. $ee Cal.J$r.2d, >ud6es" M 52. : 3earin6 in t3e $upreme Court 4as denied" and on >anuar- 2(" 19%3" t3e remittitur 4as sent do4n. Hn t3e same da- respondent /iled proposed /indin6s 4it3 t3e trial ,ourt and appellant /iled t3e /ollo4in6 mattersF 1. +$tatement o/ !is0uali/i,ation2 a6ainst >ud6e C3ristian pursuant to subdivision 5 o/ se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. 93e statement alle6ed t3e appointment o/ >ud6e C3ristian as administrator. ?t also alle6ed t3at >ud6e C3ristian si6ned an a//idavit on >anuar- 24" 19%3" statin6 in partF +?n servin6 43at ? ,onsider mdut- ... in de/errin6 resi6nin6 as >ud6e and de/errin6 takin6 o//i,e as :dministrator o/ t3e Healt3 and Wel/are :6en,- ... ? 3ave a,,epted t3e personal sa,ri/i,e involved. ? am ,on,erned" 3o4ever" t3at /urt3er dela-s 4ill produ,e problems t3at 4ill trans,end t3e personal" and 4ill involve t3e proper /un,tionin6 and ,ontinuit- o/ t3e o//i,e 43i,3 ? am to assume.2 :ppellant believed t3ese /a,ts 4ere su//i,ient to s3o4 >ud6e C3ristian 4as pre5udi,ed and bias a6ainst appellant. :ll t3ree matters 4ere set /or 3earin6 on Februar- 11" 19%3. Ho4ever" on Februar- 4" 19%3" a 4eek be/ore t3e s,3eduled 3earin6" >ud6e C3ristian ordered t3e +$tatement o/ !is0uali/i,ation2 stri,ken /rom t3e /iles and denied t3e motion /or mistrial. >ud6e C3ristian also denied t3e motion to re,eive additional eviden,e. His order den-in6 t3e motion stated in partF +;?<t appearin6 to t3e ,ourt t3at t3e above entitled ,ause 4as 3ereto/ore t3orou63land /airl- tried and t3at it is unne,essar- to take /urt3er eviden,e in said ,ause" and it appearin6 to t3e ,ourt t3at plainti// 3as not been prevented /rom submittin6 an- proposed /indin6s" and it /urt3er appearin6 to t3e ,ourt t3at additional ar6ument b- t3e parties is unne,essar- to a ,omplete and /inal disposition o/ t3e ,ause" and it /urt3er appearin6 to t3e ,ourt t3at plainti// 3as not set /ort3 in said noti,e o/ motion" 4it3 parti,ularit-" /322 43at eviden,e or ar6ument it proposes to brin6 be/ore t3e ,ourt" and plainti// 3avin6 not supported said motion b- an- a//idavit or de,laration" ...7 +... ?t ?s Hrdered t3at said motion be" and t3e same is 3ereb- denied.2 >ud6e C3ristian t3en entered respondent@s proposed /indin6s" entered 5ud6ment /or respondent" and resi6ned 3is o//i,e as 5ud6e. Hn Februar- (" 19%3" appellant /iled 43at it ,alled a +$upplemental" :dditional and $e,ond $tatement o/ !is0uali/i,ation2 a6ainst >ud6e C3ristian. ?t re,ited t3e events 43i,3 took pla,e on Februar- 4" 19%3" and alle6ed t3at su,3 events proved t3e pre5udi,e and bias o/ >ud6e C3ristian. 93e statement re0uested t3e ,ourt to de,lare void all pro,eedin6s taken b- >ud6e C3ristian a/ter >anuar- 2(" 19%3. Hn Februar- 1(" 19%3" appellant /iled a noti,e o/ motion /or an order va,atin6 and settin6 aside t3e minute order" /indin6s o/ /a,t" ,on,lusions o/ la4 and 5ud6ment o/ Februar- 4" 19%3. 93e noti,e alle6ed t3e pro,eedin6s 4ere void. 93e matters alle6ed in t3e +$upplemental" :dditional and $e,ond $tatement o/ !is0uali/i,ation2 /ormed part o/ t3e basis /or t3e motion. Hn :pril 15" 19%3" a 3earin6 4as 3eld on t3e motion be/ore >ud6e M,!ermott. 93e motion 4as denied on :pril 25" 19%3" and t3is appeal /ollo4ed. )1a* :ppellant@s /irst ,ontention is t3at >ud6e C3ristian 4as dis0uali/ied /or ,ause under subdivision 5 o/ se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure /rom passin6 on its >anuar- 2(" 19%3" motions /or mistrial and additional eviden,e.

$e,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure provides in partF +Bo 5usti,e or 5ud6e s3all sit or a,t as su,3 in an- a,tion or pro,eedin6F +5. W3en it is made to appear probable t3at" b- reason o/ bias or pre5udi,e o/ su,3 5usti,e or 5ud6e a /air and impartial trial ,annot be 3ad be/ore 3im.2 )2* Dias or pre5udi,e ,onsists o/ a +mental attitude or disposition o/ t3e 5ud6e to4ards a part- to t3e liti6ation" ...2 )Evans v. )uperior Court% 10' Cal.:pp. 3'2" 3(0 ;290 =. %%2<.* )3* ?n order /or t3e 5ud6e to be dis0uali/ied" t3e pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a parti,ular part- )Evans v. )uperior Court% supra5 People v. )weet% 19 Cal.:pp.2d 392" 39% ;%5 =.2d (99<* and su//i,ient to impair t3e 5ud6e@s impartialitso t3at it appears probable t3at a /air trial ,annot be 3eld. )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 57 Evans v. )uperior Court% supra% at p. 3(17 /323?riggs v. )uperior Court% 215 Cal. 33%" 343 ;10 =.2d 1003<.* :n- part- ma- /ile +a 4ritten statement ... settin6 /ort3 t3e /a,t or /a,ts ,onstitutin6 t3e 6round o/ t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ su,3 5ud6e.2 )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5.* )4* +;?</ t3e 4ritten statement is timel- and states su//i,ient /a,ts" it is t3e dut- o/ t3e 5ud6e to /ile an ans4er 4it3in /ive da-s or be dis0uali/ied /rom sittin6 until t3e matter o/ 3is bias is passed upon b- anot3er 5ud6e. )In re *arrington% (' Cal.:pp.2d (31" (34&(35 ;19' =.2d '(3<7 Bosen'ield v. &osper% '0 Cal.:pp.2d 21'" 221&223 ;1%0 =.2d (42<7 1 Witkin" Cal. =ro,edure )1954*" pp. 1'3&1'%.* W3ere" 3o4ever" t3e statement is le6allinsu//i,ient" t3e 5ud6e ma- i6nore it or strike it /rom t3e /iles. ) =e6lett v. Paci'ic Mut. Li'e Ins. Co.% 22 Cal.2d 393" 401 ;139 =.2d 934<7 ish6augh v. ish6augh% 15 Cal.2d 445" 45' ;101 =.2d 10(4<7People eA rel. Aepart!ent o' Pu6lic Works v. McCullough% 100 Cal.:pp.2d 101" 10( et se0. ;223 =.2d 3'<.*2 )>eating v. )uperior Court% 45 Cal.2d 440" 443 ;2(9 =.2d 209<.* )1b* :ppellant@s /irst statement o/ dis0uali/i,ation /ails to alle6e an- /a,ts /rom 43i,3 an in/eren,e o/ bias or pre5udi,e b- >ud6e C3ristian to4ard appellant ,ould be dra4n. :t most" t3e statement s3o4s t3at >ud6e C3ristian 4ould be unable to ,ontinue 4it3 t3e ,ase i/ /urt3er matters 4ould be len6t3-. :ppellant ar6ues t3at be,ause >ud6e C3ristian /elt 3e 3ad to a,,ept 3is ne4 position o/ administrator as soon as possible" 3e 4as disposed to4ard den-in6 appellant@s motions 4it3out a /air ,onsideration o/ t3e merits so t3at /urt3er pro,eedin6s 4ould not dela- 3is resi6nation as 5ud6e. :ppellant ,ontends t3at t3ese ,onsiderations s3o4 bias and pre5udi,e. 93e ,ontention 3as no merit. ?/ >ud6e C3ristian 3ad /elt t3ere 4as an- merit to appellant@s motions and /elt t3at /urt3er pro,eedin6s 4ould be in,onvenient /or 3im" undoubtedl- 3e 4ould 3ave resi6ned /rom t3e ,ase in /avor o/ anot3er 5ud6e. >ud6e C3ristian 3ad no personal bias or pre5udi,e to4ard appellant nor an- interest in t3e ,ase" and" indeed" none is ,laimed. 93ere 4as no reason at all /or >ud6e C3ristian to den- appellant /urt3er pro,eedin6s on a s3o4in6 o/ 6ood ,ause. :ppellant@s supplemental statement o/ dis0uali/i,ation adds not3in6 to t3e /irst. $in,e appellant /ailed to alle6e an- /a,ts s3o4in6 bias and pre5udi,e" >ud6e C3ristian properl- stru,k t3e statement /rom t3e /iles. +eo.le v. S8eet, 1, Cal.(...2d 3,2, 62 +.2d 8,, %Cal.(... 1 -ist. Mar 02, 1,31)

$tatement must assert /a,ts.

%2) Criminal La4&&Findin6s&&Motion to 8a,ate&&!is0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6es&& Dias&& =re5udi,e. ?n said prose,ution" t3e trial 5ud6e 4as 5usti/ied in passin6 upon and den-in6 de/endant@s appli,ation /or dis0uali/i,ation o/ t3e 5ud6e and motion to va,ate t3e /indin6s o/ ,onvi,tion" 43ere de/endant 3ad 4aived a trial b- 5ur-" and t3e appli,ation 4as obviousl- /rivolous" t3e onl- 6round assi6ned bein6 based on t3e /a,t t3at t3e trial 5ud6e siA -ears be/ore 3ad been a deput- distri,t attorne-" and no rulin6 o/ t3e trial ,ourt durin6 t3e trial 4as assi6ned as error" and it 4as not

intimated t3at t3e eviden,e 4as insu//i,ient to sustain t3e /indin6 o/ 6uilt" or t3at an- bias or pre5udi,e eAisted a6ainst de/endant. %3) Criminal La4&&!is0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6es&&Dias&&=re5udi,e. De/ore bias or pre5udi,e ,an dis0uali/- a 5ud6e" it must be s3o4n to eAist a6ainst t3e parti,ular part- movin6 /or t3e substitution o/ t3e 5ud6e. %4) Criminal La4&&=ro,edure&&Motions&&La,3es. #nder se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure an appli,ation /or dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e is to be presented at t3e earliest pra,ti,able opportunit- a/ter appearan,e and dis,over- o/ t3e /a,ts ,onstitutin6 t3e 6round o/ dis0uali/i,ation7 and in said prose,ution" 43ere t3e appli,ation 4as not made until a/ter all t3e issues o/ /a,t in t3e ,ase 3ad been 3eard and determined" it 4as not seasonabl- made and 4as properldenied. $ee 14 Cal. J$r. (2%. . :nd in approvin6 t3e denial o/ t3e appli,ation /or dis0uali/i,ation it 4as 3eld in e//e,t t3at 43ere t3e appli,ation appears to be based on /rivolous 6rounds" and sets /3,6 /ort3 no /a,t or /a,ts as re0uired b- se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure ,onstitutin6 le6al 6rounds /or dis0uali/i,ation" but on t3e ,ontrar- presents onl- an issue o/ la4" t3e trial 5ud6e 3imsel/ ma- properl- rule upon and den- t3e appli,ation. ?n t3e present ,ase t3e appli,ation 4as obviousl- /rivolous" t3e onl- 6round assi6ned /or dis0uali/i,ation bein6 t3at some siA -ears prior to t3e ,ommission o/ t3e o//ense ,3ar6ed in t3e in/ormation t3e trial 5ud6e o,,upied t3e position o/ deput- distri,t attorne- in said ,ount-7 and in t3is ,onne,tion de/endant 4ent on to aver t3at /or t3at reason t3e trial 5ud6e entertained +a ver- 3i63 and personal re6ard /or t3e distri,t attorne- and ea,3 o/ t3e deput- distri,t attorne-s ... and 3as and 4ill ,ontinue to resent an- re/le,tion upon t3e distri,t attorne-@s said o//i,e7 t3at in rulin6 on 0uestions o/ la4 and on admission o/ eviden,e a//iant believes and avers t3at it is probable t3at t3e a//iant ,annot 3ave a /air or unbiased trial o/ t3e issues o/ la4 in said trial b- said 5ud6e ...2 :s stated" 3o4ever" not a sin6le rulin6 made b- t3e trial ,ourt durin6 t3e ,ourse o/ t3e trial is assi6ned as error7 nor is it an-43ere intimated t3at t3e eviden,e is le6all- insu//i,ient to sustain t3e trial ,ourt@s /indin6 as to de/endant@s 6uilt7 )3* /urt3ermore" it is 4ell establis3ed t3at be/ore bias or pre5udi,e ,an dis0uali/- a 5ud6e it must be s3o4n to eAist a6ainst t3e parti,ular part- movin6 /or t3e substitution o/ t3e 5ud6e )14 Cal. >ur. (217 33 Cor. >ur. 1000*" and no su,3 ,laim is 3ere made. )4* ?t ma- be stated also" in support o/ t3e trial ,ourt@s rulin6" t3at se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure relatin6 to t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ 5ud6es de,laresF +93e statement o/ a part- ob5e,tin6 to t3e 5ud6e on t3e 6round o/ 3is dis0uali/i,ation" s3all be presented at t3e earliest pra,ti,able opportunit-" a/ter 3is appearan,e and dis,over- o/ t3e /a,ts ,onstitutin6 t3e 6round o/ t3e 5ud6e@s dis0uali/i,ation" and in an- event be/ore t3e ,ommen,ement o/ t3e 3earin6 o/ an- issue o/ /a,t in t3e a,tion or pro,eedin6 be/ore su,3 5ud6e27 and in t3e ,ase o/ People v. ?er!an% 11' Cal. :pp. 334 ;4 =a,. )2d* 22%<" t3e trial ,ourt@s rulin6 den-in6 an appli,ation /or dis0uali/i,ation 4as sustained upon t3e 6round t3at t3e appli,ation 4as not seasonabl- made. Here" as 4ill be noted" t3e appli,ation 4as not made until a/ter all issues o/ /a,t in t3e ,ase 3ad been 3eard and determined. /3,1 93e 5ud6ment o/ ,onvi,tion and t3e order den-in6 t3e motion /or ne4 trial are a//irmed. Evans v. S$.erior Co$rt o0 Los (n!eles Co$nt3, 101 Cal.(... 312, 2,0 +. 662 %Cal.(... 2 -ist. J$l 22, 1,30)

%) !?$W#:L?F?C:9?HB HF >#!C $&&D?:$&&=J >#!?C &&W# $9?HB HF L:W&& =JHH?D?9?HB. ?n a pro,eedin6 in pro3ibition to restrain a 5ud6e /rom 3earin6 ,ertain a,tions upon t3e 6round o/ 3is alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e" 43ere t3e material /a,ts are undisputed" t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ t3e 5ud6e be,omes a 0uestion o/ la4 rat3er t3an o/ /a,t. =ro3ibition to prevent pre5udi,ed 5ud6e /rom pro,eedin6 4it3 ,ase" note" ( (. L. :. 123(. %) ?!.&&!?$CH8 JK HF D?:$&&:==L?C:9?HB 9H !?$W#:L?FK&&9?M . ?n t3is pro,eedin6 in pro3ibition to restrain a 5ud6e /rom 3earin6 ,ertain a,tions upon t3e alle6ed 6round o/ 3is bias and pre5udi,e" 43ere petitioners 4ere de/endants in several a,tions and dis,overed t3e alle6ed bias durin6 t3e trial o/ one o/ t3e a,tions" 43ereupon t3e- made appli,ation to dis0uali/- t3e 5ud6e" t3eir appli,ation" 3avin6 been made as soon as t3e alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e 4ere as,ertained" did not ,ome too late. %) ?!.&&=:J9? $&&W?9B $$ $&&H=?B?HB HF >#!C . =re5udi,e and bias on t3e part o/ a 5ud6e must be a6ainst a part-" and t3e /a,t t3at t3e 5ud6e re6arded a 4itness /or petitioners as dis0uali/ied /or 3avin6 ,ommitted" as 3e t3ou63t" per5ur- in anot3er matter" 4as merel- 3is opinion as to t3e vera,it- o/ a 4itness. $ee 14 Cal. J$r. (217 15 :. C. L. 530. %) ?!.&&>#JK 9J?:L$&&D L? F HF C#?L9&&H=?B?HB HB W# $9?HB HF L:W. :n eApression o/ opinion b- a 5ud6e upon a 0uestion o/ la4 does not dis0uali/- 3im upon anot3er 3earin6 o/ t3e ,ase7 nor is a 5ud6e dis0uali/ied b- a statement o/ 3is belie/ as to t3e 6uilt o/ a person ,3ar6ed 4it3 an o//ense be/ore 3im. %) ?!.&&=J >#!?C &&D?:$&&!#9K HF >#!C . ?/ t3e trial 5ud6e is ,onvin,ed /rom t3e /a,ts o/ t3e inte6rit- o/ 3is o4n ,ondu,t and motives" o/ t3e /a,t t3at 3is sole desire is to see t3e la4 applied 4it3 e0ual and eAa,t 5usti,e to all" and /urt3er t3at t3e ob5e,t o/ t3e part- 43o alle6es t3e dis0uali/i,ation is to t34art 5usti,e" or to 6et t3e ,ase be/ore anot3er 5ud6e o/ 3is o4n ,3oosin6" 3e s3ould 3ave ,oura6e to a,t a,,ordin6l-7 on t3e ot3er 3and" 43en t3e /a,ts" 3onestl- stated" point to a ,ertain ,ondition t3at 4ould absolutel- in/luen,e men in t3e business transa,tions o/ li/e" and 43en applied to t3e parti,ular ,ase 4ould lead a reasonable person to 3esitate as to 43et3er or not t3e 5ud6e ,ould" under t3e ,ir,umstan,es" ,onsiderin6 t3e 4eaknesses o/ 3uman nature" entirel- i6nore su,3 /a,ts" t3ere s3ould be no 3esitation in ,allin6 anot3er 5ud6e. %) ?!.&&>#!C @$ D L? F HF = J>#JK&&F:?J 9J?:L. ?n t3is pro,eedin6 in pro3ibition to restrain a 5ud6e /rom 3earin6 ,ertain a,tions upon t3e 6round o/ 3is alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e" 43ere petitioners 4ere de/endants in several a,tions" LLand t3e 5ud6e 3eard one o/ t3em and in 3is opinion likened petitioners@ ,ourse o/ ,ondu,t to t3at o/ a Mor6an or a Nidd" indi,atin6 3is /irm belie/ t3at per5ur- 3ad been ,ommitted b- t3em" it appeared probable t3at a /air and impartial trial ,ould not be 3ad b- reason o/ t3e 5ud6e@s bias and pre5udi,e" and it 4ould 3ave been un/air to ask 3im" under t3e ,ir,umstan,es" to tr- issues o/ /a,t involvin6 t3e 3onor" inte6rit- and vera,it- o/ petitioners" 43om 3e 3ad so re,entl,ondemned and denoun,ed. %) ?!.&&=J >#!?C &&= J>#JK&&J?CH9 9H CH:BC >#!C $. ven i/ t3e 5ud6e 4as ,orre,t in 3is /ier,e dis,ommendation o/ petitioners" t3e- 4ere entitled to 6o be/ore t3e 5ud6e o/ anot3er department o/ t3e ,ourt and to 3ave t3e ot3er ,ases tried b- a 5ud6e 43o 4ould assume t3at t3e- 4ere tellin6 t3e trut3 until t3e ,ontrar- 3ad been s3o4n" and 43ere no attaint o/ per5ur- 4ould /ollo4 t3em. $#MM:JK =JHC !?BC in =ro3ibition to restrain t3e $uperior Court o/ Los :n6eles Count- and

Clair $. 9appaan and William C. !oran" >ud6es t3ereo/" /rom 3earin6 ,ertain a,tions. Writ 6ranted. 93e /a,ts are stated in t3e opinion o/ t3e ,ourt. C:9 $" >. pro te!.&93is is an ori6inal appli,ation /or a 4rit o/ pro3ibition to be dire,ted to t3e $uperior Court o/ Los :n6eles Count- and t3e Honorable Clair $. 9appaan" 5ud6e t3ereo/" ,ommandin6 and dire,tin6 t3e ,ourt and t3e 5ud6e mentioned to desist and re/rain /rom 3earin6 and tr-in6 t4elve di//erent ,ases no4 pendin6 and a4aitin6 trial in t3e $uperior Court. 93e importan,e o/ t3e matter in respe,t to t3e 0uestions o/ la4 and pra,ti,e 43i,3 it involves 4ill re0uire a some43at detailed statement o/ /a,ts out o/ 43i,3 it arises. ?t appears t3at at various times durin6 t3e mont3 o/ >anuar-" 192(" t4elve a,tions 4ere ,ommen,ed in t3e $uperior Court o/ Los :n6eles Count- b- t4elve individual plainti//s a6ainst t3ese petitioners and ot3ers as de/endants" in 43i,3 a,tions dama6es 4ere demanded in t3e sum o/ G2%0"0007 t3at t3erea/ter anot3er a,tion" one in res,ission" 4as ,ommen,ed b- one WalI" as plainti//" and petitioners 3erein 4ere named de/endants. 93erea/ter petitioners" as de/endants in t3e t3irteen a,tions" /iled demurrers 43i,3 /312 4ere overruled and t3e- t3ereupon ans4ered. 93e t3irteen a,tions are no4 pendin6 in t3e respondent ,ourt and are set /or trial be/ore t3e respondent 5ud6e above mentioned. Hn or about >anuar- 13" 192(" $te4art M,Leod ,ommen,ed an a,tion in t3e $uperior Court in t3e a/oresaid ,ount- a6ainst t3ese petitioners as de/endants. 93e ,ase 4as" on :pril 10" 1929" ,alled /or trial. 93e trial o/ t3e ,ause lasted /ort-&t3ree ,ourt da-s and 4as ,on,luded >une 21" 1929" and 4as t3erea/ter taken under submission on >ul- 15" 1929. 93e 5ud6e later announ,ed /rom t3e ben,3 3is de,ision in t3e ,ase in /avor o/ t3e plainti// M,Leod and a6ainst t3e de/endants. We 4ill advert later to a portion o/ t3is de,ision. 93e re,ord 3erein ,learl- s3o4s t3at t3e ,ases 4ere never ,onsolidated /or trial. :ll o/ t3e a,tions 4ere set do4n on t3e master ,alendar o/ t3e ,ourt /or trial on :pril 9" 1929" and t3erea/ter on t3at dat3e- 4ere all trans/erred to department 5" presided over b- >ud6e 9appaan. 93e ,ase o/ McLeod v. Evans et al. 4as ,alled /or trial and t3ereupon an order 4as made ,ontinuin6 t3e ot3er ,ases until :pril 10" 1929. 93e trial o/ t3e M,Leod ,ase 4as resumed and t3e ot3er ,ases 4ere ,ontinued +to be taken up at t3e ,on,lusion o/ t3e ,ase t3en on trial.2 :t t3e ,on,lusion o/ t3e trial o/ t3e M,Leod ,ase t3e respondent 5ud6e made an order ,ontinuin6 t3e ot3er ,ases to $eptember 30" 1929" in department 45. ?t is averred b- petitioners t3at 43en t3e ot3er ,ases 4ere ,alled >ud6e 9appaan" 43o 4as t3en presidin6" stated t3at 3e re,o6niIed t3at b- reason o/ 3is statements made durin6 t3e trial and at t3e ,on,lusion o/ t3e M,Leod ,ase 3e 4as dis0uali/ied to tr- t3e ot3er ,ases" and t3ereupon made an order ,ontinuin6 t3em to !e,ember 12" 1929" on t3e master ,alendar" but not in 3is department /or trial. Hn !e,ember 12" 1929" t3e ,auses 4ere a6ain ,ontinued. LL93erea/ter petitioners learned t3at t3e respondent 5ud6e intended to tr- t3e ,ases" and /iled t3erein" eA,ept in t3e ,ause kno4n as t3e DaAter ,ase" an a//idavit o/ bias and pre5udi,e a6ainst >ud6e 9appaan. ?t is averred t3at t3e a//idavit 4as /iled pursuant to se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. Like4ise t3e attorne- /or t3e plainti// /iled an a//idavit in t3e $mit3 ,ase. 93erea/ter" on t3e t3irtiet3 da- o/ >anuar-" 1930" >ud6e 9appaan made and /iled 3is a//idavit in response to petitioners@ a//idavit o/ bias /316 and pre5udi,e. Copies o/ t3e respe,tive a//idavits are set out in t3e petition 3ere. 93e attorne-s /or petitioners and t3e respe,tive attorne-s /or t3e plainti//s in t3e t4elve ,auses 4ere unable to a6ree upon a 5ud6e to 3ear and determine t3e 0uali/i,ations o/ >ud6e 9appaan under t3e a//idavits o/ bias and pre5udi,e. 93erea/ter t3e ,3airman o/ t3e 5udi,ial ,oun,il" Honorable William H. Waste" desi6nated and appointed t3e respondent >ud6e William C. !oran to 3ear and determine t3e matter. Hn t3e 2't3 o/ Februar-" 1930" t3e matter 4as presented" ar6ued and

submitted to >ud6e !oran upon t3e pleadin6s" /iles" re,ords and a//idavits t3en on /ile" and >ud6e !oran" on t3e 12t3 o/ Mar,3" rendered 3is de,ision and order t3at >ud6e 9appaan 4as not dis0uali/ied /rom 3earin6 t3e matters. From t3e steno6rap3i, report o/ t3e oral ar6ument o/ ,ounsel be/ore t3is ,ourt it ,learl- appears t3at >ud6e !oran re,eived no oral eviden,e upon t3e 3earin6 o/ t3e matter o/ t3e alle6ed dis0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e 9appaan" and t3at t3e a//idavits 4ere t3e onl- eviden,e presented. LL93ere is no ,on/li,t in t3e material /a,ts as alle6ed. //;1< 93ere/ore" 43ere t3e /a,ts are undisputed" as t3e- are in t3is ,ase" t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ t3e 5ud6e be,omes a 0uestion o/ la4 rat3er t3an o/ /a,t. ?n t3e a//idavit o/ t3e petitioner >o3n :. vans" /iled in t3e various ,ases" it is ,laimed t3at >ud6e 9appaan is biased and pre5udi,ed and t3at a//iant ,annot 3ave a /air and impartial 3earin6 o/ t3e ,auses b- reason t3ereo/. ?t is unne,essar- to set out in detail t3e ,ontents o/ t3is len6t3- a//idavit. From a ,are/ul anal-sis it ,an ,learl- be seen t3at petitioners@ ,laim o/ bias and pre5udi,e on t3e part o/ >ud6e 9appaan is predi,ated upon 43at t3e 5ud6e said in 3is opinion to and ,on,ernin6 t3e petitioner >o3n :. vans and 3is brot3er" !avid vans. 93e eA,erpt /rom t3e 5ud6e@s opinion is set /ort3 in t3e a//idavit and petition. 93e ,on,ludin6 part o/ t3e opinion" 43i,3 is ob5e,ted to b- petitioners and 43i,3 t3e- ,laim eviden,es bias and pre5udi,e" is as /ollo4sF +?n passin6 on t3e eviden,e o/ t3e 4itnesses" t3e Court 3as been impressed 4it3 t3is /a,tF t3at 4it3 t4o eA,eptions ? believe t3ere 3as been no 4ill/ul misstatement o/ /a,ts on t3e part o/ an- 4itnesses. Memor-" o/ ,ourse" is but a /leetin6 t3in6 at best. 9ime" pla,e and ,ir,umstan,es are measured b- t3e minds/311 o/ men and are al4a-s sub5e,t to t3e personal e0uation. Je,olle,tion is dimmed btime" and revived b- ,onsultation" at best an un,ertain met3od. 93ere are t4o eA,eptions in t3e ,ase in t3at re6ardF t3at o/ t3e de/endant and 3is brot3er. 93e de/endant >o3n :. vans is a man o/ more t3an ordinar- intelli6en,e" but ? am satis/ied /rom t3e eviden,e 3e entered on a ,ourse o/ dealin6 t3at 4ould 3ave done ,redit to a Mor6an or Nidd&to use t3e 4ords o/ a most distin6uis3ed n6lis3 5urist" 3e @3oisted t3e Dla,k Fla6.@ :s to 3is brot3er&@3e o/ t3e t4o names" 3e but mirrored t3e deportment o/ >o3n" but 3e la,ked t3e 3ardi3ood to ,arr- it t3rou63" eit3er t3rou63 /ear o/ t3e la4 or la,k o/ brain po4er&? am in,lined to believe it is t3e last" be,ause i/ 3e 3ad t3e 3ardi3ood o/ 3is brot3er" 3e 4ould 3ave been Jobinson Crusoe and not Frida-.2@ LL://iant states /urt3er" on in/ormation and belie/" t3at t3e 5ud6e intended to sa- and 4is3ed to be understood as sa-in6 t3at t3ere 4ere t4o eA,eptions amon6 t3e 4itnesses 43o 3ad testi/ied be/ore 3im" 43o 3ad made 4il/ul misstatement o/ /a,ts7 t3at t3ese t4o eA,eptions 4ere >o3n :. vans and 3is brot3er . !. vans" and t3at 3e" t3e 5ud6e" did not believe a//iant nor 3is brot3er in t3e a,tion t3at 3ad 5ust been ,ompleted nor 4ould 3e believe t3em in t3e t4elve ot3er a,tions to be tried7 t3at 3e 3ad t3e opinion t3at in t3e transa,tion relatin6 to t3e or6aniIation and 3andlin6 o/ t3e trust involved in t3e ,ases a//iant took ot3er people@s mone- and propert- 4it3out an- ,ompun,tion o/ ,ons,ien,e and 4it3 t3e depravit- and abandon o/ a pirate7 t3at a//iant and 3is brot3er" as 4ell as Frank . !avis" 4ill 6ive material testimon- in t3e trial o/ t3e remainin6 ,ases7 t3at t3e testimon- is ne,essar- to t3e proper de/ense in ea,3 o/ t3e matters. LL://iant /urt3er alle6es" upon in/ormation and belie/" t3at t3e 5ud6e stated in t3e presen,e o/ several persons t3at 3e 3ad kno4n Frank . !avis" a 4itness /or t3e de/endants in t3e M,Leod ,ase" and t3at 3e 4ould dis0uali/- 3imsel/ on 3is o4n motion to sit in said ,ases be,ause !avis" in 3is opinion" 3ad ,ommitted per5ur- in anot3er pro,eedin6 in 3is ,ourt7 LLt3at >ud6e 9appaan" i/ 3e tries t3e ot3er ,ases" 4ill not believe t3e testimon- o/ a//iant" . !. vans or Frank . !avis" all o/ 43i,3 testimon- 4ill be true and material to t3e de/ense. Je/eren,e is also made b- a//iant to a purported stipulation t3at all t3e testimon- re,eived in t3e /318 M,Leod ,ase 43i,3 4as material and relevant s3ould be used and ,onsidered as testimon- in t3e ot3er t4elve ,ases. >ud6e 9appaan denies t3at on $eptember 30" 1929" or at an- ot3er time" 3e re,o6niIed t3at 3e 4as dis0uali/ied to tr- t3e ,ase be,ause o/ an- statements made in t3e M,Leod

,ase7 avers t3at 3e 3oped t3at t3e ,ause 4ould be tried b- some ot3er 5ud6e7 t3at upon t3e ,on,lusion o/ t3e testimon- in t3e M,Leod ,ase in t3e se,ond 4eek o/ >ul-" 1929" 3e took t3e ,ase under submission and t3erea/ter 6ave a de,ision7 t3at 3e is un/amiliar 4it3 t3e pleadin6s in all o/ t3e ot3er ,ases. 93e 5ud6e /urt3er sa-s t3at 4it3in a da- or t4o a/ter ,ommen,in6 t3e 3earin6 in t3e M,Leod ,ase 3e ,alled all o/ t3e attorne-s into ,3ambers and stated t3at Frank . !avis 3ad been 6uilt-" in 3is opinion" o/ serious mis,ondu,t in ot3er matters be/ore 3im" and t3at i/ t3e latter 4as a material 4itness it 4as a 0uestion 43et3er or not 3e" >ud6e 9appaan" s3ould pro,eed 4it3 t3e trial7 t3at a/ter t3e ,onversation 3e 4as re0uested b- t3e parties to pro,eed7 t3at 3e 3ad no dealin6s 4it3 >o3n vans or !avid vans prior to t3e trial. >ud6e 9appaan /urt3er denies t3at 3e is biased or pre5udi,ed as a6ainst vans or 3is 4itness" or that any opinion he !ay have o' the! or their veracity is derived 'ro! any other source than 'ro! the in'or!ation and evidence introduced during the trial o' the case o' McLeod v. Evans7 t3at 3e is dis0uali/ied to tr- t3e ,ase b- reason o/ ano/ said /a,ts or ,ir,umstan,es7 t3at 3e 3as /ormed an opinion as to t3e de/endants@ liabilit- in an- o/ t3e ,ases ot3er t3an t3e one in 43i,3 5ud6ment 3as been ordered. Jespondents 3ave interposed a 6eneral demurrer and a demurrer to t3e 5urisdi,tion o/ t3is ,ourt. 93e- also 3ave /iled an ans4er den-in6 man- o/ t3e alle6ations ,ontained in t3e petition. 93e prin,ipal /a,ts 3erein are undisputed. ?t ma- be noti,ed" in,identall-" t3at t3e petition does not s3o4 t3at petitioners atta,k t3e 5usti,e or 4isdom o/ >ud6e 9appaan@s de,ision in t3e M,Leod ,ase upon t3e 6round o/ un/airness. $in,e t3e t4o vans 4itnesses in t3e M,Leod ,ase are parties to and doubtless ne,essar- 4itnesses in all o/ t3e ot3er ,ases" and >ud6e 9appaan +re,o6niIed t3at ... 3e 4as dis0uali/ied to tr- t3e ot3er ,ases2 and it is admitted t3at t3e- ,annot be tried as ,onsolidated" and t3ere 4as no stipulation /or ,onsolidation" it 4ould seem t3at /31, but one primar- 0uestion remains /or de,ision7 t3e le6al ri63t to 3ave t3e ,ause tried b- a di//erent 5ud6e. 93ere are several ot3er points 43i,3 are in,idental to but ,onne,ted 4it3 t3e main point. 93ese 4e s3all pro,eed to dis,uss be/ore takin6 up t3e prin,ipal 0uestion. ;2< Have t3e petitioners seasonabl- presented t3eir ob5e,tions to t3e 0uali/i,ations o/ >ud6e 9appaan to 3ear and determine t3e remainin6 ,ases" t3e respondents ,ontendin6 t3at t3eir appli,ation to dis0uali/- 3im 3as ,ome too lateO $e,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure" as amended in 1929 ;$tats. 1929" p. 95'<" provides a 6eneral s,3eme /or t3e pro,eedin6 to be 3ad to dis0uali/- a 5ud6e o/ t3e superior ,ourt. 93is se,tion amon6 ot3er t3in6s providesF +93e statement o/ a part- ob5e,tin6 to t3e >ud6e" on t3e 6round o/ 3is dis0uali/i,ation" s3all be presented at t3e earliest pra,ti,able opportunit-" a/ter 3is appearan,e and dis,over- o/ t3e /a,t ,onstitutin6 t3e 6round o/ t3e >ud6e@s dis0uali/i,ation" in an- event be/ore t3e ,ommen,ement o/ t3e 3earin6 o/ an- issue o/ /a,t in t3e a,tion or pro,eedin6 be/ore su,3 >ud6e.2 ?n vie4 o/ respondents@ de/ense it be,omes ne,essar- to determine i/ t3ere 4as in /a,t a stipulation t3at t3e eviden,e addu,ed in t3e M,Leod ,ase 4as to be used in t3e ot3er t4elve or t3irteen ,ases. Wit3out statin6 t3e eviden,e in detail it appears t3at t3ere 4as no su,3 stipulation. Havin6 so determined" it is unne,essar- to ,onsider petitioners@ point /urt3er as to t3e seasonableness o/ t3is appli,ation to dis0uali/>ud6e 9appaan" as it is plainl- seen t3at t3e appli,ation to dis0uali/- 4as /iled as soon as t3e alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e 4as as,ertained b- petitioners" and t3at t3ere ,ould not possibl- 3ave been a ,laim o/ bias and pre5udi,e made b- petitioners at or be/ore t3e ,ommen,ement o/ t3e M,Leod ,ase" be,ause an- su,3 ,laim ori6inated in" 6re4 out o/ and 4as /ounded upon t3e opinion o/ t3e 5ud6e in t3e M,Leod ,ase. ;3< 93at t3e respondent 5ud6e re6arded t3e 4itness !avis as dis0uali/ied /or 3avin6 ,ommitted" as 3e t3ou63t" per5ur- in anot3er matter is merel- an opinion as to t3e vera,it- o/ a 4itness. 93e pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a party. 2Purvis v. rink" 55 Fla. '15 ;4% $out3. 1'1<7 Conn v. Chadwick" 1' Fla. 42(7Western ?ank o' )cotland v. #all!an et al." 15 Wis. 101.*/380

!oes t3ere eAist su,3 bias or pre5udi,e in t3e mind o/ t3e trial 5ud6e as 4ill pre,lude 3im /rom 3earin6 and passin6 upon t3e remainin6 ,asesO Hr in ot3er 4ords" does t3ere eAist in t3e mind o/ t3e trial 5ud6e su,3 bias or pre5udi,e a6ainst t3ese petitioners t3at it is improbable b- reason t3ereo/ t3at a /air and impartial trial ,an be 3ad be/ore 3imO Hur $upreme Court" in Estate o' ried!an" 1'( Cal. 2'" 39 ;1'2 =a,. 140<" de,lared t3at bias or pre5udi,e is a ,ondition o/ mind. Like4ise" pra,ti,all- t3e same rule is laid do4n in 15 Julin6 Case La4" at pa6e 530" in t3e /ollo4in6 lan6ua6eF +93e 4ords @bias@ and @pre5udi,e@ as used in t3e la4 o/ t3e sub5e,t under ,onsideration re/er to t3e mental attitude or disposition o/ t3e 5ud6e to4ards a part- to t3e liti6ation" and not to an- vie4s t3at 3e ma- entertain re6ardin6 t3e sub5e,t matter involved.2 Funk U Wa6nall@s $tandard !i,tionar- de/ines +bias2 as +a mental predile,tion or pre5udi,e.2 Webster@s Be4 ?nternational !i,tionar6ives t3is de/initionF +: leanin6 o/ t3e mind7 propensit- or prepossession to4ard an ob5e,t or vie4" not leavin6 t3e mind indi//erent7 bent7 tenden,-7 in,lination7 pre5udi,e.2 +Dias2 is a parti,ular in/luential po4er 43i,3 s4a-s t3e 5ud6ment&t3e in,lination o/ mind to4ard a parti,ular ob5e,t&and is not s-non-mous 4it3 +pre5udi,e.2 : man ,annot be pre5udi,ed a6ainst anot3er 4it3out bein6 biased a6ainst 3im" but 3e ma- be biased 4it3out bein6 pre5udi,ed. )Willis v. )tate" 12 Ca. 444" 449.* Wuotin6 /rom 15 Julin6 Case La4" 530" 4e readF +93e basis o/ t3e dis0uali/i,ation is t3at personal bias or pre5udi,e renders t3e 5ud6e unable to eAer,ise 3is /un,tions impartiall- in t3e parti,ular ,ase"2 ,itin6 E: parte A!erican )teel ?arrel Co." 230 #. $. 35 ;5' L. d. 13'9" 33 $up. Ct. Jep. 100'<. =etitioners ,ontend t3at sin,e t3e trial 5ud6e 3eard t3e M,Leod ,ase and made up 3is mind as to all matters involved t3erein" 3e 3as no4 be,ome in,apable o/ a//ordin6 petitioners a /air and impartial trial in t3e several a,tions pendin6 a6ainst t3em. Webster de/ines +impartial2 as +not partial7 not biased in /avor o/ one part- more t3an anot3er7 indi//erent7 unpre5udi,ed7 disinterested.2 ?n Funk U Wa6nall@s $tandard !i,tionar- 4e /ind t3e 4ord +impartial2 de/ined as /ollo4sF +Bot disposed to pre/er or /avor one above anot3er7 unbiased7 unpre5udi,ed7 /381 5ust7 /air.2 ;4< LL:n eApression o/ opinion b- a 5ud6e upon a 0uestion o/ la4 does not dis0uali/- 3im upon anot3er 3earin6 o/ t3e ,ase. )Pearson v. *opkins" 2 B. >. L. 1957 Leonard v. Willco:" 101 8t. 195 ;142 :tl. '%2" ''0<7 )tate v. Woods" 124 La. '3( ;50 $out3. %'1<.* Bor is a 5ud6e dis0uali/ied b- a statement o/ 3is belie/ as to t3e 6uilt o/ a person ,3ar6ed 4it3 an o//ense be/ore 3im. )People v. Phillips" 30 Cal. :pp. 31 ;15' =a,. 1003" 1005<7 33 C. >. 1009.* 93ere are" 3o4ever" ,ases contra to t3is. $ee )ta!p v. Co!!onwealth" 195 N-. 404 ;243 $. W. 2'<" and )tate v. ullerton" '% Hkl. 35 ;1(3 =a,. 9'9<. LL93e rules above stated are not ,on,lusive o/ t3e situation in t3e instant ,ase" /or" as it /ull- appears /rom t3e re,ord 3erein" t3e trial 5ud6e 4ill not onl- be ,alled to pass upon t3e 0uestions o/ la4 t3at ma- be presented to 3im in t3e ,ases" but 3e 4ill nevert3eless be ,alled upon to pass upon t3e issues o' 'act" and t3e evidence upon t3ese issues o/ /a,t 4ill no doubt be ,on/li,tin6. LLHis ,on,lusions upon t3e issues o/ /a,t ma- be determinative o/ t3e ,ase. ?n ot3er 4ords" t3e 5ud6e 4ill be in t3e position o/ a 5uror" as ever- trial 5ud6e is 43en 3earin6 and tr-in6 a non5ur- ,ase 43ere issues o/ /a,t are involved. He 4ill be obli6ed to ,onsider and 4ei63 t3e eviden,e and t3e ,redibilit- o/ t3e 4itnesses" and amon6 t3ese 4itnesses 4ill be t3e petitioners 3erein. ?t is alle6ed in t3e petition" and it is not denied" t3at petitioners 4ill 6ive testimon- 43i,3 4ill be relevant" material and pertinent to t3eir de/enses. ?t 3as been 3eld b- some o/ t3e 3i63est ,ourts o/ t3e states o/ t3e #nion t3at 43en 5ud6es are obli6ed to pass upon t3e /a,ts no 6ood reason is apparent 43- t3e test o/ 0uali/i,ation s3ould be di//erent /rom t3at in t3e ,ase o/ 5urors" /or t3e 5ud6e" under su,3 ,ir,umstan,es" is in realit- a 5uror passin6 upon 0uestions o/ /a,t. ))tate v. ?oard o' Education" 19 Was3. (" 13 ;%' :m. $t. Jep. '0%" '10"40 L. J. :. 31'" 52 =a,. 31'<.* $o /ar as 4e 3ave been able to as,ertain t3is test 3as not as

-et been imposed in t3is state. +93e bias or pre5udi,e 43i,3 ma- dis0uali/- a 5ud6e must be o/ a ,3ara,ter ,al,ulated to seriousl- impair 3is partialit- and s4a- 3is 5ud6ment.2 )33 C. >. 1000. $ee *oyt v. Hu!walt" 149 Cal. 3(1 ;(% =a,. %00<7 People v. indley" 132 Cal. 301 ;%4 =a,. 4'2<7 *iggins v. )an Aiego" 12% Cal. 303 ;5( =a,. '00<7 /382Aakan v. )uperior Court" 2 Cal. :pp. 52 ;(2 =a,. 1129<.* De/ore t3e adoption o/ se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure as it no4 stands" 43en t3e trial 5ud6e 4as obli6ed to pass upon 3is o4n 0uali/i,ations" t3e !istri,t Court o/ :ppeal" 43ile ,onsiderin6 t3is point in Aakan v. )uperior Court% supra" remarkedF +93e 5ud6e s3ould not onl- be 3onest and impartial" but 3is a,ts and ,ondu,t s3ould be su,3 t3at t3ere ,an be no /oundation /or 0uestionin6 3is motives. ?t is apparent t3at t3e se,tion ma- be 6reatl- abused bdis3onest liti6ants or uns,rupulous la4-ers. ?t is t3ere/ore t3e dut- o/ t3e trial 5ud6e to ,are/ull- s,rutiniIe ea,3 ,ase" to t3e end t3at t3e la4 ma- not be abused /or sinister purposes. ;2< ?/ t3e trial 5ud6e is ,onvin,ed /rom t3e /a,ts o/ t3e inte6rit- o/ 3is o4n ,ondu,t and motives" o/ t3e /a,t t3at 3is sole desire is to see t3e la4 applied 4it3 e0ual and eAa,t 5usti,e to all" and /urt3er t3at t3e ob5e,t o/ t3e part- 43o alle6es t3e dis0uali/i,ation is to t34art 5usti,e" or to 6et t3e ,ase be/ore anot3er 5ud6e o/ 3is o4n ,3oosin6" 3e s3ould 3ave ,oura6e to a,t a,,ordin6l-. Hn t3e ot3er 3and" 43ere t3e /a,ts are 3onestl- stated" and 43en so stated t3e- point to a ,ertain ,ondition t3at 4ould absolutel- in/luen,e men in t3e business transa,tions o/ li/e" and 43en applied to t3e parti,ular ,ase 4ould lead a reasonable person to 3esitate as to 43et3er or not t3e 5ud6e ,ould" under t3e ,ir,umstan,es" ,onsiderin6 t3e 4eaknesses o/ 3uman nature" entirel- i6nore su,3 /a,ts" t3ere s3ould be no 3esitation in ,allin6 in anot3er 5ud6e" so t3at t3e /ountain 3ead o/ 5usti,e s3ould be above suspi,ion.2 ;6< ?n t3e instant ,ase" t3ere/ore" a/ter ,are/ull- ,onsiderin6 t3e aut3orities 3ereto/ore 6iven and appl-in6 t3e test last stated&43i,3 test 4e t3ink /air" 5ust" e0uitable and impartial&to t3e re,ord as it is presented to us" ,an it be said as a matter o/ la4 t3at t3e trial 5ud6e is dis0uali/ied and t3at t3e petitioners 4ould not be a//orded a /air and impartial trial as ,ontemplated b- la4O LLDrie/l- advertin6 to t3e re,ord be/ore us" 4e no43ere /ind a denial in t3e ans4er o/ t3e trial 5ud6e nor in 3is a//idavit t3at 3e did not intend to sa- nor did not 4ant to be understood as sa-in6 t3at t3e de/endants 3ad testi/ied /alsel-" or t3at t3e- 4ere 4it3out vera,itor inte6rit-. He ver- /rankl- states +t3at an- opinion 3e ma- 3ave o/ t3em or eit3er o/ t3em or t3eir vera,it- is not derived /rom an- ot3er /383 sour,e t3an /rom t3e in/ormation and eviden,e introdu,ed durin6 t3e trial o/ t3e ,ase o/ McLeod v. Evans.2 93e opinion delivered b- t3e respondent 5ud6e" 43i,3 opinion ,ontained several pun6ent" tren,3ant and ,austi, ,omments to and ,on,ernin6 t3ese petitioners" and 43i,3 likened t3eir ,ourse o/ ,ondu,t to a Mor6an and a Nidd" 4as imparted 4it3 t3e utmost sin,erit-. 93e remarks in t3e de,ision 4ere" no doubt" prompted b- t3e respondent 5ud6e@s sense o/ 5usti,e and be,ause o/ 3is /irm belie/ t3at per5ur- 3ad been ,ommitted b- t3e petitioners in 3is ,ourt. :nd /urt3ermore" 4e ma- 4ell appre,iate t3at t3ere must 3ave arisen in t3e breast o/ t3e trial 5ud6e a ri63teous indi6nation 43en 3e t3ou63t t3at petitioners 3ad 4il/ull- testi/ied /alsel-. We 3ave not t3e eviden,e be/ore us. We must assume t3at t3e de,ision and opinion o/ >ud6e 9appaan" and ever- part t3ereo/" is ampl- sustained b- t3e eviden,e. Hn t3e ot3er 3and" is it /air and 5ust to allo4 a 5ud6e 43o 3as su,3 a de/inite" positive" /iAed and /irm belie/" 5usti/iable t3ou63 it ma- be" ,on,ernin6 t3ese petitioners" t3e t4o de/endants" 43o 4ere re6arded b- 3im as pirates and /alsi/iers" to a6ain pass upon t3e issues o/ /a,t in a ,ase 43ere t3e de/endants 4ill undoubtedl- be material 4itnessesO Would a reasonable person 3esitate as to 43et3er or not t3e trial 5ud6e ,ould" under t3e ,ir,umstan,es" ,onsiderin6 t3e 4eaknesses o/ 3uman nature" entirel- i6nore su,3 /a,ts& t3e belie/ t3at t3e petitioners 3ad ,ommitted per5ur-O Can t3e 5ud6e i6nore 3is opinion and belie/" t3ou63 3onest it ma- be" t3at t3ese petitioners 3ave 4il/ulltesti/ied /alsel-O We t3ink not. +?s it made to appear probable t3at" b- reason o/

bias or pre5udi,e o/ su,3 5ud6e ... a /air and impartial trial ,annot be 3ad be/ore 3imO2 )Code Civ. =ro,." se,. 1'0" as amended.* We t3ink it 3as. Furt3ermore" it 4ould be un/air to ask a 5ud6e" under t3ese ,ir,umstan,es" to a6ain tr- issues o/ /a,t involvin6 t3e 3onor" inte6rit- and vera,it- o/ men 43om 3e 3ad so re,entl- ,ondemned and denoun,ed. 051 Atra ,ent&K /ound 4it3in ,ent&K markup. 051 Atra ,ent&K /ound 4it3in ,ent&K markup. ;1< :ssumin6 t3at t3e trial 5ud6e 4as ,orre,t in 3is /ier,e dis,ommendation o/ petitioners" t3e- nevert3eless are entitled to 6o be/ore a 5ud6e o/ anot3er department o/ t3e ,ourt" one 43o 4ill assume t3at t3e- are tellin6 t3e trut3 until t3e ,ontrar3as been s3o4n and 43ere no attaint o/ per5ur- 4ill /ollo4 t3em. 93ere t3e- mapresent t3eir /384 de/ense" i/ an- t3e- 3ave" to a 5ud6e 43o 3as not a /iAed or settled opinion o/ t3eir inte6rit- or vera,it-. 93e $upreme Court o/ 8ermont in Leonard v. Willco:% supra" a ,ase dealin6 4it3 a 5ud6e@s dis0uali/i,ation" saidF +: liti6ant ou63t not to be ,ompelled to submit to a 5ud6e 43o 3as alread- ,on/essedlpre5ud6ed 3im" and 43o is ,andid enou63 to announ,e 3is de,ision in advan,e" and 3is serious doubt t3at 3e 4ould do ot3er4ise t3an ad3ere to it" no matter 43at t3e eviden,e must be.2 )Citin6 )tate v. ?oard o' Education% supra5 Willia!s v. Bo6inson" % Cus3. )Mass.* 333" 3357 Mores v. Julian" 45 B. H. 52 ;(4 :m. !e,. 114" 11%<.* EE .arte (6erican Steel &arrel Co., 230 U.S. 32, 33 S.Ct. 1001, 21 L.Ed. 131, %U.S.'.@. J$n 16, 1,13)

,ase 4it3 bad result.

#o3t v. F$68alt, 14, Cal. 381, 86 +. 600 %Cal. J$n 28, 1,06)

,ase 4it3 bad result.

> C9M B9 DK :!M?B?$9J:9J?P & =JH= J9K HF ! C ! B9 & :!8:BC M B9&! F B$ & 9J#$9 FHJ F:9H J&$#==HJ9 HF F?B!?BC$. ?n an a,tion o/ e5e,tment b- t3e administratriA o/ a de,eased brot3er o/ t3e de/endant" 43o 3ad ousted t3e plainti//" 43ere t3e eviden,e 4as su//i,ient to s3o4 t3at t3e propert- 3ad been deeded to t3e plainti// b- t3e o4ner /or a ,onsideration advan,ed b- t3eir /at3er to t3e de,edent upon 3is marria6e" in ,onsideration o/ an a6reement t3at t3e /at3er" 43o 4as separated /rom 3is 4i/e" s3ould make a 3ome 4it3 3im" 43i,3 4as done /or t3ree -ears" a/ter 43i,3 t3e /at3er s3ot 3is 4i/e and son" and 43ile in 5ail made a deed to t3e de/endant" 43o ,laimed in de/ense a trust o/ t3e de,edent /or 3is /at3er" /indin6s /or t3e plainti// 4ere 3eld su//i,ientl- supported b- t3e plainti//@s eviden,e" ,orroborated b- respe,table and disinterested 4itnesses. ?!.&:!8 J$ =H$$ $$?HB&J $?! BC HF F:9H J W?9H $HB&H#$9 J DK $#D$ W# B9 CJ:B9 & =J $CJ?=9?HB BH9 $HHWB. 93ere 4as no adverse possession o/ t3e /at3er 43ile 3e remained an inmate o/ t3e /amil- o/ t3e de,eased son under t3e a6reement /or an advan,ement o/ t3e ,onsideration to t3e son and /or support in t3e son@s /amil- upon t3e land7 and t3e onl- adverse possession 4as t3at o/ t3e de/endant" 43o ousted plainti// under t3e subse0uent deed /rom t3e /at3er" 43i,3 4as o/ too s3ort duration to ,onstitute a pres,riptive title. ?!.& 8?! BC &:!M?$$?HB$ HF W?F :F9 J CJ:B9 9H H#$D:B!& H:JML $$ J#L?BC. 93e estate o/ t3e de,eased 3usband ,ould not be bound b- admissions made b- t3e plainti// administratriA as 3is 4i/e in 3is li/etime" a/ter t3e 6rant made to t3e 3usband" and t3e- 4ere properl- eA,luded7 nor ,ould t3e de/endant 3ave been pre5udi,ed b- t3e a,tion o/ t3e ,ourt in eA,ludin6 su,3 admissions 43en plainti// testi/ied /ull- in t3e ,ase" and mi63t 3ave been impea,3ed b- proo/ o/ ,ontrarde,larations ,ontained in depositions on /ile.

?!.&MH9?HB 9H C:LL ?B :BH9H J >#!C &:FF?!:8?9 CH:JC?BC D?:$&J L? F&CH#B9 J :FF?!:8?9 HF >#!C . #pon a motion o/ de/endant to ,all in anot3er 5ud6e /or alle6ed bias" in so /ar as 3is a//idavit avers 3is belie/ o/ su,3 bias" it amounted to not3in6" and ,an onl- be ,onsidered in ,onne,tion 4it3 t3e /a,ts 43i,3 it states" and 43ere it does not state all t3e /a,ts" or states t3em in,orre,tl-" it 4as ,ompetent /or t3e 5ud6e in ,onne,tion 4it3 anot3er ,ounter a//idavit to present 3is o4n ,ounter a//idavit statin6 t3e true /a,ts kno4n to 3im. ?!.&?B$#FF?C? B9 $HHW?BC HF D?:$&:C9?HB HF >#!C WH?L =JH$ C#9?BC :99HJB K. W3ere" upon all t3e /a,ts stated in t3e a//idavit and ,ounter a//idavits" not3in6 appeared to support de/endant@s motion" eA,ept t3e bare /a,t t3at siAteen -ears previousl- t3e 5ud6e" 43ile a,tin6 as distri,t attorne-" prose,uted and ,onvi,ted t3e de/endant" 3is /at3er" and a ,on/ederate /or an a66ravated ,ase o/ batter-" and 3ad t3en" in 3is o//i,ial ,apa,it-" laid t3e /a,ts be/ore t3e 6overnor /or 3is in/ormation 43en passin6 upon a petition /or pardon" no 5ust in/eren,e ,an be dra4n /rom said /a,ts t3at t3e 5ud6e ,ould not tr- t3is ,ase 4it3 per/e,t impartialit-. :== :L /rom a 5ud6ment o/ t3e $uperior Court o/ den-in6 a ne4 trial. M. =. Dennett" >ud6e. 93e /a,ts are stated in t3e opinion o/ t3e ,ourt. +eo.le v. 7indle3, 132 Cal. 301, 64 +. 412 %Cal. Mar 22, 1,01) l !orado Count- and /rom an order

Je/eren,es must be made to t3e reporter1s trans,ript.

CJ?M?B:L L:W&9J?:L & D?:$ HJ =J >#!?C HF >#!C & CHB$9J#C9?HB HF CH! & $#FF?C? BCK HF :FF?!:8?9. #nder subdivision 4 o/ se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure" in order to obtain t3e ,3an6e o/ t3e 5ud6e be/ore 43om a ,riminal ,ase is to be tried" it is not su//i,ient t3at t3e a//idavit o/ t3e de/endant s3ould state simpl- t3at t3e de/endant +believes t3at 3e ,annot 3ave a /air and impartial trial2 be/ore t3e 5ud6e" b- reason o/ 3is bias or pre5udi,e" but it must be made to appear /rom t3e /a,ts stated in t3e a//idavit or a//idavits on /ile" to t3e satis/a,tion o/ a reasonable mind" t3at a /air trial ,annot be 3ad be/ore t3e 5ud6e about to tr- t3e ,ase" b- reason o/ t3e bias or pre5udi,e o/ t3e 5ud6e. ?!. & ?B$#FF?C? B9 $HHW?BC & F:C9$ BH9 $HHW?BC D?:$ HJ =J >#!?C . Fa,ts stated in t3e de/endant@s a//idavit" & t3at t3e de/endant 4as a su,,ess/ul ,andidate /or o//i,e a6ainst a relative o/ t3e 5ud6e7 t3at t3e 5ud6e 4it3dre4 3is ,onsent to redu,e t3e bail o/ t3e de/endant 4it3out 6ivin6 an- reason t3ere/or7 t3at" t3e insanit- o/ t3e de/endant 3avin6 been set up as a de/ense" t3e 5ud6e stated in t3e 3earin6 o/ t3e 5ur- t3at 3e 3ad never 3ad an- doubt o/ de/endant@s sanit-" t3e a//idavit not s3o4in6 43at ,alled /ort3 t3e statement7 and t3at t3e 5ud6e denied 3im a /orei6n subpXna" 4it3out an- s3o4in6 t3at 3e took t3e re0uisite steps to obtain one" & are not su//i,ient to establis3 t3e bias or pre5udi,e o/ t3e 5ud6e. ?!. & ! C?$?HB HF >#!C #=HB W# $9?HB$ HF F:C9 & J 8? W #=HB :== :L. 93e statute leaves t3e 3earin6 o/ a motion to ,3an6e t3e 5ud6e /or bias and pre5udi,e" preventin6 a /air and impartial trial" to t3e 5ud6e o/ t3e ,ourt in 43i,3 it is made" and 3is de,ision on t3e 0uestions o/ /a,t be/ore 3im s3ould be treated t3e same as t3e de,ision o/ a ,ourt on an- ot3er 0uestion o/ /a,t" and 4ill not be inter/ered 4it3 on appeal" unless it is plainl- ,ontrar- to t3e eviden,e. ?!. & M?$CHB!#C9 HF >#JK & ?M= :CH?BC 8 J!?C9 & ! F B!:B9@$ :FF?!:8?9 & ?BFHJM:9?HB :B! D L? F.

93e verdi,t o/ a 5ur- ,annot be impea,3ed in t3is state b- t3e a//idavits o/ 5urors s3o4in6 mis,ondu,t on t3e part o/ an- member o/ t3e 5ur-" eA,ept 43ere t3e verdi,t is rea,3ed +b- a resort to t3e determination o/ ,3an,e.2 Bor ,an t3e verdi,t be impea,3ed b- t3e 3earsa- statements o/ 5urors7 and an a//idavit o/ t3e de/endant as to t3e mis,ondu,t o/ t3e 5ur-" based on in/ormation and belie/" is entitled to no 4ei63t. 93e de/endant 4as ,onvi,ted o/ embeIIlin6 ei63t t3ousand dollars" publi, mone- in 3is 3ands as taA&,olle,tor o/ $an Luis Hbispo Count-" and senten,ed to ei63t -ears in t3e state prison. He appeals /rom t3e 5ud6ment o/ ,onvi,tion. We 4ill ,onsider t3e points ur6ed /or reversal in t3e order in 43i,3 t3e- appear in appellant@s brie/. 1. W3en t3is ,ase 4as ,alled /or trial" de/endant@s attorne-" pursuant to t3e provisions o/ se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure" moved t3e ,ourt to se,ure t3e servi,es o/ some 5ud6e" ot3er t3an t3e re6ular 5ud6e o/ t3e ,ourt" to preside at t3e trial and in t3e subse0uent pro,eedin6s. 93e a//idavit o/ t3e de/endant 4as /iled and read in support o/ t3is motion. 93e a//idavit o/ t3e distri,t attorne- in rebuttal 4as also /iled and read on t3e motion. 93e ,ourt denied t3e motion. ?n 3is a//idavit" de/endant alle6es /ive a,ts o/ t3e 5ud6e o/ t3e trial ,ourt as tendin6 to s3o4 3is pre5udi,e a6ainst de/endant. 93ese a,ts are as /ollo4sF 1. 93e said 5ud6e" in !e,ember" 1(9'" advo,ated t3e ,andida,- o/ 3is brot3er&in&la4 /or taA& ,olle,tor" as a6ainst de/endant@s ,andida,- /or t3e same o//i,e" be/ore t3e board o/ supervisors" and de/endant re,eived t3e appointment" mu,3 to t3e displeasure o/ said 5ud6e. 2. 93at said 5ud6e 3ad ,onsented to a redu,tion o/ de/endant@s bail /rom ten t3ousand to siA t3ousand dollars" and t3en 4it3dre4 said ,on,ession" 4it3out assi6nin6 an- reason t3ere/or. 3. 93at a/ter a /ormer trial o/ t3is ,ase and a disa6reement o/ t3e 5ur-" t3e venin6 DreeIe" a ne4spaper o/ $an Luis Hbispo" publis3ed an editorial" ,riti,isin6 and deridin6 t3e de/endant and t3e disa6reein6 5ur-" and intended to pre5udi,e t3e publi, mind a6ainst de/endant. !e/endant sa-s 3e veril- believes t3at a bias eAists in t3e mind o/ said 5ud6e a6ainst de/endant" or ot3er4ise t3e proprietor" editor" or mana6er o/ said paper 4ould 3ave been ,ited to s3o4 ,ause 43- 3e s3ould not be punis3ed /or /304 ,ontempt. LL4. 93at" at a /ormer trial o/ t3e ,ase" a/ter de/endant@s ,ounsel 3ad made 3is openin6 statement to t3e 5ur-" said 5ud6e" +in an audible voi,e" and 4it3in 3earin6 o/ t3e 5ur-" said substantiall- t3at 3e 3ad never 3ad an- doubt as to t3e sanit- o/ t3e de/endant" to 43i,3 remark de/endant@s ,ounsel t3en and t3ere dul- eA,epted.2 5. 93at" prior to t3e /irst trial" said 5ud6e" at re0uest o/ t3e prose,ution" issued a /orei6n subpXna /or one >o3n C. Fraser" and not4it3standin6 t3e /ailure o/ servi,e in t3is state on said Fraser" 3e 4as served in !enver" Colorado" and attended as a 4itness" and said 5ud6e ille6all- ordered a 4arrant dra4n on t3e ,ount- treasurer in Fraser@s /avor /or G1(4.45" in pa-ment o/ 3is travelin6 eApenses /rom !enver" Colorado" to $an Luis Hbispo and return. 93at de/endant re0uested a /orei6n subpXna /or one Derr-" t3e auditor o/ t3e Fidelit- and !eposit Compan-" a material 4itness /or de/endant" and said 5ud6e re/used t3e order. ?t is not su//i,ient" in a ,ase o/ t3is kind" to alle6e in t3e a//idavit simpl- t3at t3e de/endant +believes t3at 3e ,annot 3ave a /air and impartial trial"2 et,." but it must be made to appear b- t3e a//idavit or a//idavits on /ile t3at a /air trial ,annot be 3ad be/ore t3e 5ud6e about to tr- t3e ,ase" b- reason o/ t3e bias and pre5udi,e o/ su,3 5ud6e. )Code Civ. =ro,." se,. 1'0" subd. 4.* LL93e a//idavit or a//idavits must not onl- state /a,ts" but t3e /a,ts stated must establis3 to t3e satis/a,tion o/ a reasonable mind t3at t3e 5ud6e 3as a bias or pre5udi,e t3at 4ill in all probabilitprevent 3im /rom dealin6 /airl- 4it3 t3e de/endant. We are un4illin6 to t3ink t3at a trial 5ud6e 4ould be pre5udi,ed" 4it3in t3e meanin6 o/ t3e statute ,ited" a6ainst one on trial be/ore 3im" on a,,ount o/ 3is su,,ess/ul ,andida,- /or o//i,e a6ainst a relative o/ su,3 5ud6e. 93e 4it3dra4al o/ t3e ,onsent to redu,e bail 4it3out 6ivin6 an- reason t3ere/or simplamounted to a re/usal to redu,e t3e bail. We ,annot sa- t3at t3e bail 4as eA,essive

under all t3e ,ir,umstan,es o/ t3e ,ase" and on t3e 0uestion under ,onsideration no importan,e ,an be atta,3ed to t3e a,tion o/ t3e ,ourt in t3is re6ard. LL?nsanit- bein6 set up as a de/ense" LLi/ t3e 5ud6e 3ad 4antonl-" and 4it3out ano,,asion /or it" announ,ed in t3e presen,e o/ t3e 5ur- t3at 3e 3ad never 3ad an- doubt as to de/endant@s sanit-" t3is mi63t indi,ate t3at 3e 4as not disposed to 6ive t3e de/endant a /air trial7 but t3e a//idavit does /302 not 6ive us t3e /ull pro,eedin6s in re/eren,e to t3is matter7 it does not state 43at 4as said b- de/endant@s ,ounsel" in 3is openin6 statement or else43ere" to ,all /ort3 an- remark /rom t3e ,ourt as to t3e sanit- o/ de/endant. 93e eAa,t lan6ua6e o/ ,ourt and ,ounsel 4as undoubtedltaken do4n b- t3e ,ourt reporter at t3e time" and t3is" or its substan,e" s3ould 3ave been presented at t3e 3earin6 o/ t3e motion. LL?n t3e absen,e o/ a s3o4in6 to t3at e//e,t" it 4ill not be presumed t3at t3e ,ourt made t3e remark 4it3out an- ,all /or it. 93e onl- proper o,,asion" t3at o,,urs to us" t3at t3e ,ourt 4ould 3ave to announ,e t3at 3e never 3ad an- doubt as to de/endant@s sanit- 4ould be in response to a su66estion on t3e part o/ de/endant@s attorne- t3at 3is ,lient 4as t3en insane" and a demand t3at t3e 0uestion o/ 3is t3en present sanit- be tried be/ore a 5ur- ,alled spe,iall- /or t3at purpose" in a,,ordan,e 4it3 t3e provisions o/ se,tion 13%( o/ t3e =enal Code. LL?t 4ould be no eviden,e o/ pre5udi,e in t3e 5ud6e" /or 3im to de,lare" in response to a demand o/ t3is nature" t3at 3e 3ad no doubt as to t3e sanit- o/ de/endant7 and i/ ,ounsel desired t3at t3e de,laration s3ould not be made in t3e presen,e o/ t3e 5ur-" 3e s3ould not ,all /or t3e rulin6 in t3eir presen,e" but s3ould re0uest t3e ,ourt to dire,t t3em to retire. :s to t3e denial o/ a /orei6n subpXna" t3ere is not3in6 in de/endant@s a//idavit to s3o4 t3at 3e ever /iled 4it3 t3e 5ud6e an a//idavit" or took t3e re0uisite steps to entitle 3im to a /orei6n subpXna. )=en. Code" se,. 1330.*: mere re0uest 4as not su//i,ient to entitle t3e de/endant to a /orei6n subpXna. We deem it su//i,ient" under t3is 3ead" to sa-" in ,on,lusion" t3at t3e statute )Code Civ. =ro,." se,. 1'0* leaves t3e 3earin6 upon a motion o/ t3is kind to t3e 5ud6e in 43ose ,ourt it is made" and ,onse0uentl- 3is de,ision on t3e 0uestions o/ /a,t be/ore 3im s3ould be treated t3e same as t3e de,ision o/ a ,ourt on an- ot3er 0uestion o/ /a,t" and 4e ,an inter/ere 4it3 it on appeal onl- 43en it is plainl- ,ontrar- to t3e eviden,e. :/ter a ,are/ul ,onsideration o/ t3e a//idavits used on t3e 3earin6" 4e ,annot sa- t3at t3e trial ,ourt 4as not 4arranted in den-in6 t3e motion. )*iggins v. )an Aiego" 12% Cal. 303" 312.* 2. ?t appears t3at t3e Fidelit- and !eposit Compan- o/ Mar-land 4as suret- on de/endant@s o//i,ial bond as taA& /306 ,olle,tor7 and at t3e trial t3e prose,ution introdu,ed eviden,e" in t3e 4a- o/ ,3e,ks and t3e indorsements t3ereon" to s3o4 t3at said suret- 3ad paid to t3e ,ount- G("24%.50" presumabl- on a,,ount o/ de/endant@s de/al,ation. 93e de/endant ob5e,ted to t3ese ,3e,ks as eviden,e" on t3e 6round t3at t3e- 4ere +in,ompetent" immaterial" and irrelevant /or an- purpose in t3e ,ase.2 93e prose,utin6 attorne- said" +We 4ill s3o4 its ,onne,tion.2 93e overrulin6 o/ t3e ob5e,tion is assi6ned as error. ?t appears" subse0uentl- in t3e trial" t3at t3e eApert a,,ountants 43o /i6ured out t3e s3orta6e in t3e taA&,olle,tor@s o//i,e /ound and testi/ied t3at t3ere 4as a s3orta6e o/ G3"040.49" a/ter ,reditin6 t3e G("24%.50 43i,3 4as paid into t3e ,ount- treasur- b- t3e bond ,ompan-. 93e de/endant 3avin6 been indi,ted /or embeIIlin6 G("000" to prove t3e ,rime as ,3ar6ed it 4as proper to s3o4 3o4 t3is item o/ G("24%.50 6ot into t3e treasur-" and t3at it 4as not paid in bt3e de/endant7 /or t3is purpose" at least" t3e eviden,e ob5e,ted to 4as pertinent and proper. Dut t3e de/endant no4 ur6es t3at t3is eviden,e o/ transa,tions bet4een t3ird parties ,ould not bind t3e de/endant7 and its admission must 3ave raised a presumption in t3e minds o/ t3e 5ur-" t3at be,ause t3is mone- 4as paid in b- t3e bond ,ompan-" t3ere/ore t3e de/endant 4as s3ort in 3is a,,ounts 4it3 t3e ,ount-. :t t3e trial" no ob5e,tion o/ t3is nature 4as made7 i/ su,3 an ob5e,tion 3ad been made" it

4ould 3ave been in order /or t3e ,ourt to limit t3e admission o/ t3e eviden,e to its le6itimate purpose" and in t3e absen,e o/ an- re0uest t3at it be in an- 4a- limited" on appeal t3e de/endant ,annot be 3eard to ,omplain t3at it 4as not limited. 93e ot3er eA,eptions o/ appellant to t3e rulin6s o/ t3e ,ourt in re,eivin6 and re5e,tin6 eviden,e are 4it3out merit" and are not o/ a nature to re0uire /urt3er dis,ussion. 3. 93e t3eor- o/ t3e de/ense seems to 3ave been t3at de/endant 4as insane at t3e date o/ 3is alle6ed o//ense" Bovember 1(" 1(9(" and t3at su,3 insanit- 4as due" in part at least" to a lon6&,ontinued over&indul6en,e in intoAi,atin6 li0uors. 4. ?t is t3e settled la4 o/ t3is state t3at t3e verdi,t o/ a 5ur- ,annot be impea,3ed b- t3e a//idavits o/ 5urors s3o4in6 mis,ondu,t on t3e part o/ an- member o/ t3e 5ur-" eA,ept 43ere t3e verdi,t is rea,3ed +b- a resort to t3e determination o/ ,3an,e.2 )Code Civ. =ro,." se,. %5'.*Bor ,an a verdi,t be impea,3ed b- t3e 3earsa- statements o/ 5urors re6ardin6 su,3 mis,ondu,t. )People v. ACo''" 105 Cal. %32.*?t is e0uall,lear t3at de/endant@s a//idavit as to t3e mis,ondu,t o/ t3e 5ur-" based as it is solel- on in/ormation and belie/" is entitled to no 4ei63t. 93ere 4as no ,ompetent or proper eviden,e o/ mis,ondu,t o/ t3e 5ur- laid be/ore t3e ,ourt" and t3e ,ourt verproperl- re/used to 6rant a ne4 trial. 93e 5ud6ment s3ould be a//irmed. #i!!ins v. Cit3 o0 San -ie!o, 126 Cal. 303, 28 +. 100 %Cal. 4ct 13, 18,,)

bad ,ase
Grelin! v. S$.erior Co$rt in and 0or Los (n!eles Co$nt3, 63 Cal.(...2d 323, 146 +.2d ,32 %Cal.(... 2 -ist. Mar 21, 1,44) %6) >ud6es M 4%&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Dias and =re5udi,e. LL93e state o/ mind o/ t3e ,3allen6ed 5ud6e must be determined /rom 43at 3e said or did" and not b- 43at 3e ma- t3ink and aver 3is state o/ mind to be. %8) >ud6es M 4%&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Dias and =re5udi,e. LLW3ere t3e trial 5ud6e a,ts as t3e trier o/ bot3 t3e /a,ts and t3e la4" 3is 0uali/i,ations" inso/ar as bias and pre5udi,e are ,on,erned" are more or less analo6ous to t3e 0uali/i,ations o/ a 5uror. %,) >ud6es M 4%)2*&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Dias and =re5udi,e. LL9o dis0uali/- a 5ud6e" a pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a part-. %10) >ud6es M 54&&!is0uali/i,ation&&=ro,eedin6s&&9ime o/ Filin6 =etition. W3ere" at t3e be6innin6 o/ t3e trial o/ a /irst ,ase a/ter 3avin6 6ranted a motion to tr- several ,ases bet4een t3e same parties in a parti,ular order" t3e trial 5ud6e stated t3at 3e ,ould not determine 43et3er t3e same a//irmative de/ense 4ould bar all ,auses o/ a,tion and t3at t3e ,ases 4ould be 3eard separatel- and individuall-" a liti6ant@s petition /or a ,3an6e o/ 5ud6e under Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" 4as not /iled too late 43en it 4as not /iled until a/ter t3e biased and pre5udi,ial remarks 4ere made 43i,3 immediatel- /ollo4ed t3e trial ,ourt@s de,ision in t3e /irst ,ase" sin,e t3e petition 4as /iled as soon as t3e bias and pre5udi,e 4ere as,ertained. $#MM:JK =JHC !?BC in pro3ibition to restrain t3e $uperior Court o/ Los :n6eles Count- and $tanle- Mosk" >ud6e t3ereo/" /rom 3earin6 ,ertain a,tions. !emurrer to petition

overruled" motion to strike portions o/ petition 6ranted in part and denied in part. CH#B$ L Leo 8. Koun64ort3 /or =etitioner. >. H. H@Connor" Count- Counsel" !ou6las !eCoster" !eput- Count- Counsel" and :l/red Citelsen /or Jespondents. WH?9 " >. =etitioner seeks b- pro3ibition to restrain t3e $uperior Court in and /or t3e Counto/ Los :n6eles" and Honorable $tanle- Mosk" a 5ud6e t3ereo/" /rom 3earin6 and tr-in6 t3ree ,ertain a,tions no4 pendin6 in t3at ,ourt" and in 43i,3 a,tions petitioner is named as a part- plainti// or de/endant. =etitioner ,ontends t3at >ud6e Mosk is dis0uali/ied /rom pro,eedin6 4it3 t3e trial o/ said a,tions on t3e 6round t3at it is +probable t3at" b- reason o/ bias or pre5udi,e o/ su,3 ... 5ud6e ... a /air and impartial trial ,an /326 not be 3ad be/ore 3im2 )subd. 5" se,. 1'0" Code Civ. =ro,.*. 93e re,ord be/ore us reveals t3at on Mar,3 %" 1942" petitioner 3erein /iled 3is ,omplaint in a,tion numbered 4'3943 /or dama6es a6ainst $aul Wals3" :nn Wals3" Jobert WooltI and Mildred WooltI" as de/endants. 93erea/ter on :pril 15" 1942" t3e above named de/endants ,ommen,ed an a,tion numbered %1(3(0 a6ainst petitioner in t3e Muni,ipal Court o/ t3e Cit- o/ Los :n6eles to re,over ,ertain rents alle6edl- due t3em. 93is last numbered a,tion 4as later trans/erred to respondent superior ,ourt and /iled t3erein under number 4'%334. D- stipulation o/ t3e parties su,3 a,tion 4as ,onsolidated 4it3 t3e /irst above named a,tion numbered 4'3943. Hn or about t3e mont3 o/ >une" 1943" petitioner 3erein /iled 3is ,omplaint in a,tion numbered 4(3(41 alle6in6 /or,ible detainer a/ter unla4/ul entr- b- de/endants. 93e de/endants in t3e a,tion /iled t3eir ans4er and also set up an a//irmative de/ense 43erein it 4as alle6ed t3at all t3e parties to t3e liti6ation 3ad entered into an oral a6reement on t3e ei63t3 da- o/ >anuar-" 1943" and +93at b- t3e terms o/ said a6reement" plainti// and t3ese de/endants did ,ompromise all ,laims eAistin6 on t3e part o/ t3ese de/endants as a6ainst said plainti// and on t3e part o/ said plainti// as a6ainst t3ese de/endants" said plainti// /orever releasin6" dis,3ar6in6 and a,0uittin6 t3ese de/endants /rom an- obli6ation or liabilit- unto said plainti// and t3ese de/endants /orever releasin6" dis,3ar6in6 and a,0uittin6 said plainti// /rom anobli6ation or liabilit- unto t3ese de/endants.2 Hn >une 12" 1943" petitioner 3erein" as plainti//" /iled a,tion numbered 4(%03( a6ainst t3e above named de/endants" 6rounded on t3e issue o/ alle6ed ,onversion o/ personal propert-. ?n t3eir ans4er t3ereto" de/endants a6ain pleaded b- 4a- o/ a spe,ial de/ense t3e a/oresaid oral a6reement o/ mutual ,ompromise o/ all ,laims. 93e liti6ation embra,ed 4it3in all o/ t3e above mentioned a,tions arose out o/ a ,ertain 4ritten lease entered into b- petitioner 3erein as lessee and t3e parties 3ereto/ore desi6nated as de/endants in ,ertain o/ t3e a,tions above enumerated" and under t3e terms o/ 43i,3 lease" t3e named de/endants demised unto petitioner /or t3e term o/ ten -ears and seventeen da-s" ,ertain real propert- improved 4it3 +a 6asoline super servi,e station /or t3e sale o/ 6asoline" /uel motor oils" tires and similarlallied produ,ts and ,ommodities"2 and upon 43i,3 t3ere 4as bein6 operated a 6oin6 business./321 93e total ,onsideration involved in t3e lease transa,tion 4as G'5"342.'2" pa-able in ,ertain stipulated installments. Hn Bovember 5" 1943" petitioner 3erein /iled in respondent ,ourt 3is +Boti,e o/ Motion2 to set t3e above named ,ases /or trial in t3e /ollo4in6 orderF )1* a,tion numbered 4(3(41 /or /or,ible detainer a/ter alle6ed unla4/ul entr- b- de/endants7 )2* a,tion numbered 4(%03( /or ,onversion o/ personal propert-7 )3* a,tion numbered 4'3943 /or /raud. 93is last named a,tion" as 3ereto/ore indi,ated" 4as b- mutual ,onsent ,onsolidated /or trial 4it3 a,tion numbered 4'%334" ori6inall- /iled in t3e muni,ipal

,ourt and trans/erred to respondent ,ourt. Hn Bovember 12" 1943" all o/ t3e a/oresaid a,tions 4ere dul- and re6ularl- assi6ned /or trial to !epartment 3' o/ respondent ,ourt" be/ore Honorable $tanle- Mosk" 5ud6e" presidin6 t3erein. #pon t3e ,allin6 o/ said a,tions /or trial" >ud6e Mosk 6ranted t3e motion o/ petitioner t3at t3e ,ause be tried in t3e order re0uested in petitioner@s a/oresaid +Boti,e o/ Motion.2 93ereupon" over petitioner@s ob5e,tion" t3e ,ourt 6ranted de/endants@ motion t3at all o/ t3e testimon- re,eived in a,tion numbered 4(3(41" t3e /irst to be tried" mi63t be deemed introdu,ed into eviden,e in t3e remainin6 a,tions numbered 4(%03(" 4'3943 and 4'%334 inso/ar as su,3 eviden,e s3ould prove ,ompetent and material to t3e issues raised in t3e last named a,tions. =ursuant to t3e provisions o/ se,tion 59' o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure" t3e ,ourt dire,ted t3at in t3e trial o/ t3e /irst ,ase" numbered 4(3(41" t3e issues raised b- t3e a//irmative de/ense pleaded b- de/endants be tried /irst. :t t3e ,on,lusion o/ t3e trial upon t3e a//irmative de/ense pleaded b- de/endants" t3e ,ourt" in a,tion numbered 4(3(41" announ,ed its de,ision in /avor o/ de/endants and a6ainst petitioner" and in su,3 de,ision t3e ,ourt de,laredF +? am ,onvin,ed t3at t3ere 4as a su//i,ient and ,omplete a6reement rea,3ed" a /ull and ,omplete a6reement rea,3ed at t3e Court House on >anuar- t3e (t3 b- all parties7 and it 4as not /or t3e ,reation o/ an interest in realt-" but /or ,an,ellation o/ t3e eAistin6 interest7 and t3e ,ases are ,lear t3at t3e- need not be in 4ritin6. Furt3er" ? am ,onvin,ed t3at plainti// Nrelin6 )petitioner 3erein* approved t3e a6reement t3at 4as rea,3ed at t3e Court House.2 ?t is" t3ere/ore" at on,e /328 apparent" ar6ue respondents" t3at t3e ,ourt@s /indin6 in /avor o/ de/endants t3at t3e oral a6reement" 43i,3 /urnis3ed t3e basis o/ t3e de/endants@ spe,ial de/enses" de,ided t3at b- su,3 a6reement t3e parties 3ad e//e,tivel- and de,isivel- ,ompromised t3eir ,laims a6ainst ea,3 ot3er and t3at su,3 /indin6 4as ne,essaril- ,on,lusive not onl- o/ t3e a,tion on trial" numbered 4(3(41" but o/ t3e remainin6 and untried a,tions numbered 4'3943" 4it3 43i,3 a,tion numbered 4'%334 4as ,onsolidated. Follo4in6 t3e rendition o/ t3e ,ourt@s de,ision" petitioner 3erein /iled 3is +=etition /or C3an6e o/ >ud6e2 under t3e provisions o/ subdivision 5 o/ se,tion 1'0" Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. ?n 3is appli,ation /or ,3an6e o/ 5ud6e" petitioner did not" nor does 3e no4" seek to dis0uali/- >ud6e Mosk /rom pro,eedin6 /urt3er in ,ase numbered 4(3(41 in 43i,3 a de,ision 4as announ,ed" but is attemptin6 to prevent said 5ud6e /rom presidin6 at t3e trial o/ t3e remainin6 ,ases 43i,3 are no4 pendin6 in 3is department o/ respondent ,ourt. #pon t3e denial o/ 3is appli,ation to dis0uali/- >ud6e Mosk b- respondent ,ourt" petitioner sou63t t3e 4rit 4it3 43i,3 4e are 3ere ,on,erned. #pon t3e return da- /iAed in t3e alternative 4rit issued b- us" respondents appeared b- demurrer to" and a motion to strike t3ere/rom ,ertain portions o/ t3e petition. :t t3e oral ar6ument it 4as a6reed t3at in t3e event respondents@ demurrer 4as overruled" and 43en t3e motion to strike 4as determined" respondents s3ould 3ave additional time 4it3in 43i,3 to /ile an ans4er to t3e petition /or a 4rit" s3ould t3e- be so advised. LL=etitioner@s appli,ation /or ,3an6e o/ 5ud6e 4as primaril- based upon ,laimed bias and pre5udi,e o/ >ud6e Mosk b- reason o/ ,ertain statements made b- 3im 43en renderin6 3is de,ision upon t3e a/orementioned a//irmative de/ense ur6ed in t3e trial o/ ,ase numbered 4(3(41. ?n ans4er to t3e +=etition /or C3an6e o/ >ud6e"2 Honorable $tanleMosk /iled 3is a//idavit den-in6 an- bias or pre5udi,e. 93e parties bein6 unable to a6ree upon a 5ud6e to 3ear and determine t3e 0uestion as to t3e 0uali/i,ations o/ >ud6e Mosk" t3e ,3airman o/ t3e 5udi,ial ,oun,il appointed and desi6nated Honorable M-ron Westover" presidin6 5ud6e o/ respondent ,ourt" to ,ondu,t su,3 3earin6. >ud6e

Westover ruled t3at >ud6e Mosk 4as not dis0uali/ied and denied t3e +=etition /or C3an6e o/ >ud6e.2 93e de,ision o/ >ud6e Westover resulted in t3e present petition /or pro3ibition" /32, 43i,3 is based on t3e t3eor- t3at >ud6e Mosk is dis0uali/ied" as a matter o/ la4" /rom presidin6 at t3e trial o/ t3e a/oresaid remainin6 and untried ,ases. : ver- ,onsiderable portion o/ t3e petition /or pro3ibition 3erein is based upon t3e ,laim t3at >ud6e Mosk is dis0uali/ied be,ause o/ erroneous rulin6s made b- 3im upon t3e admission and re5e,tion o/ eviden,e" and be,ause o/ ,laimed errors o/ la4 alle6edl- ,ommitted b- said 5ud6e in de,idin6 t3e a//irmative de/ense in /avor o/ t3e de/endants and a6ainst petitioner. We s3all not 6ive ,onsideration to su,3 ,laims be,ause o/ our belie/ t3at t3e alle6ed errors o/ la4" and t3e rulin6 o/ t3e trial 5ud6e on t3e a//irmative de/ense adverse to petitioner 3erein" do not ,onstitute su//i,ient 6rounds /or dis0uali/i,ation o/ said 5ud6e. ) 1* : 5ud6e is not dis0uali/ied to a6ain 3ear a ,ase be,ause o/ an eApression o/ opinion b- 3im upon a 0uestion o/ la4. ?t 3as also been 3eld t3at a 5ud6e is not dis0uali/ied b- a statement o/ 3is belie/ as to t3e 6uilt o/ a person ,3ar6ed 4it3 an o//ense be/ore 3im. )Evans v. )uperior Court% 10' Cal.:pp. 3'2 4(1 ;290 =. %%2<.* )2a* rroneous rulin6s a6ainst a liti6ant" even 43en numerous and ,ontinuous" /orm no 6round /or a ,3ar6e o/ bias and pre5udi,e" espe,iall- 43en t3e- are sub5e,t to revie4 on appeal. )3* =etitioner@s ,laim t3at t3e ,ondu,t and statements o/ t3e 5ud6e indi,ate t3at 3e 3ad /ormed an opinion re6ardin6 t3e le6al 0uestions 43i,3 3ad been presented in t3e ,ase does not entitle 3im to a ,3an6e o/ 5ud6e" /or it does not measure up to t3at pre5udi,e a6ainst a liti6ant 43i,3 t3e statute ,ontemplates as a basis /or dis0uali/-in6 a 5ud6e. )2b* =etitioner@s ,laim t3at in /indin6 /a,ts >ud6e Mosk /ell into error b- basin6 3is ,on,lusions upon inadmissible eviden,e or upon an erroneous vie4 o/ t3e la4" 43ile it ma- ,onstitute su//i,ient 6round /or a reversal o/ t3e 5ud6ment" 4ill not support a ,3ar6e o/ dis0uali/i,ation under se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. )Evans v. )uperior Court% supra5 ish6augh v. ish6augh% 15 Cal.2d 445" 45' ;101 =.2d 10(4<7 Estate o' ried!an% 1'1 Cal. 431 ;153 =. 91(<.* However, the rules which we have just announced are not conclusive of the situation in its entirety as presented to us in the instant case. **In the remaining untried cases Judge Mosk will be called upon to pass upon the issues of fact, and, according to the petition on file herein, the evidence upon these issues of fact will, without doubt, be conflicting. **In his *360 petition for a writ of prohibition herein, petitioner alleges, and the reporter s transcript shows, that in rendering his decision upon the affirmative defense in action numbered !"#"!$, Judge Mosk e%pressed himself of and concerning petitioner herein, as follows& **'secondly, (reling, the plaintiff was confused and uncertain) and he is apparently a man who is inherently indecisive ... every time any of these matters *referring to the contents of the oral agreement and the unsigned written version thereof+ were put up to him on the stand, he said these people were acting without his consent, that is, all e%cept (elly ... in other words, it was a big conspiracy, and I cannot believe it was ... I think the whole thing with (reling was that he anticipated the inventory would show more than it actually did ... and, so, he tried to repudiate his word from that point on., -e have set forth sufficient of the remarks made by the trial judge to indicate his state of mind at the time he made them, of and concerning petitioner. .he latter contends that Judge Mosk has clearly made it appear that it is 'probable that by reason of bias or prejudice LL... a fair and impartial trial cannot be had before him, of the remaining causes pending in his department of respondent court for the reason that by his statements Judge Mosk has shown that he will start the trial of such cases with the settled conviction that 'petitioner was without self/possession) was mi%ed and likely to mistake one thing for another) that he, your petitioner, would become confused and would fail to discriminate and would make false identification) **that he, your petitioner, would mi% and jumble things together indiscriminately in his mind and mistake one thing for another and to so mingle things in his mind that they would be indistinguishable and disordered) that your petitioner would so intermi% things in his mind that they could no longer be distinguished and that such mingling or mi%ing suggests absolute confusion and mental disorder) that your petitioner was wavering, unconstant and unsettled) that your petitioner was prone to indecision) that your petitioner was possessed of an indecisive state of mind, and that he, your petitioner, was an indecisive character) that your petitioner would repudiate his word7 that your petitioner tried to

repudiate his word in connection with the proceedings in the action 0o. !"#"!$ 7 that your petitioner as plaintiff in action 0o. !"#"!$ testified falsely, was dishonest, given to deceit, was treacherous and not faithful *361 or loyal to his obligations 7 that your petitioner was unworthy of belief7 and that he, the Honorable 1tanley Mosk, had made up his mind and did not and would not believe the testimony of your petitioner notwithstanding that your petitioner had sworn to tell the truth and nothing but the truth in consolidated actions 0os. !2#3!# and !24##!, and 5ctions 0o. !"#"!$ and 0o. !"46#"., )4* ?n ans4er to respondents@ ,laim t3at t3e 5ud6e desi6nated b- t3e ,3airman o/ t3e 5udi,ial ,oun,il 3avin6 de,ided upon ,on/li,tin6 eviden,e t3at >ud6e Mosk 4as not dis0uali/ied" su,3 determination is /inal" it ma- be ,on,eded t3at 43ere t3e ,laimed dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e is a 0uestion o/ /a,t and t3e /a,ts are in ,on/li,t" t3e ,on,lusion arrived at b- t3e 5ud6e" assi6ned to pass upon t3e 0uestion" is /inal and ,on,lusive under t3e establis3ed rule t3at appellate tribunals are bound b- t3e determination o/ t3e trier o/ /a,ts" predi,ated on ,on/li,tin6 eviden,e. Ho4ever" 43en t3ere is no substantial ,on/li,t in t3e /a,ts" and t3e pro,eedin6 bein6 be/ore us on demurrer" 4e must assume t3e trut3 o/ t3e /a,ts alle6ed" t3en t3e 0uestion o/ dis0uali/i,ation is one o/ la4" and pro3ibition 4ill lie. )?riggs v. )uperior Court% 215 Cal. 33%" 342 ;10 =.2d 53<.* )5* W3en t3e statements o/ >ud6e Mosk are read as a 43ole" it seems to us t3at t3e onl- reasonable ,on,lusion to be dra4n t3ere/rom is t3at said 5ud6e meant to assert and ,3ar6e" and did ,3ar6e" t3at t3e petitioner 4as +,on/used and un,ertain7 t3at 3e is apparentl- a man 43o is in3erentl- inde,isive7 t3at t3e is a man 43o 4ould and did repudiate 3is 4ord on,e 6iven7 t3at 3e is un4ort3- o/ belie/" and un/ait3/ul to 3is obli6ations.2 9rue" as ur6ed b- respondents" >ud6e Mosk in 3is a//idavit disavo4ed an- bias or pre5udi,e upon 3is part to4ard petitioner. LLDut t3is is not su//i,ient to ,reate a ,on/li,t in t3e eviden,e. LL93e ver- le6islative a,t 4it3 43i,3 4e are 3ere ,on,erned" b- its terms" deprives t3e ,3allen6ed 5ud6e o/ t3e po4er o/ passin6 upon 3is o4n state o/ mind. ?/ t3e statement o/ t3e ,3allen6ed 5ud6e ,on,ernin6 3is state o/ mind be 3eld bindin6 and ,on,lusive" t3en 3e 3imsel/ 4ould in e//e,t be passin6 upon t3e 0uestion o/ 3is o4n 0uali/i,ations. 93is is /orbidden b- bot3 t3e spirit and t3e letter o/ se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. )%* LL93ere/ore" t3e state o/ mind o/ t3e ,3allen6ed 5ud6e must be determined /rom 43at 3e said or did /362 and not b- 43at 3e ma- t3ink and aver 3is state o/ mind to be . )?riggs v. )uperior Court% supra.*We do not 4is3 to be understood as 3oldin6 t3at t3e a//idavit o/ t3e ,3allen6ed 5ud6e ma- not" under an- ,ir,umstan,es" be ,onsidered b- t3e 5ud6e assi6ned to pass upon t3e issue o/ bias or pre5udi,e" as to t3e eAisten,e o/ su,3 bias or pre5udi,e" but t3at in t3e instant ,ase" t3e undisputed remarks b- >ud6e Mosk" o/ and ,on,ernin6 petitioner" sustain a ,3ar6e o/ bias and pre5udi,e. )'a* ?n vie4 o/ t3e de,larations made b- t3e trial 5ud6e ,on,ernin6 petitioner" 4e are persuaded t3at it is not /air eit3er to >ud6e Mosk or to petitioner t3at t3e /ormer s3ould preside at t3e trial o/ t3e remainin6 ,ases in 43i,3 petitioner is a part- liti6ant. )(* W3ere t3e trial 5ud6e a,ts as t3e trier o/ bot3 t3e /a,ts and t3e la4" 3is 0uali/i,ations" inso/ar as bias and pre5udi,e are ,on,erned" are more or less analo6ous to t3e 0uali/i,ations o/ a 5uror. )Evans v. )uperior Court% supra% at pa6e 3(1.* Can t3ere be an- doubt t3at i/ a prospe,tive 5uror 3ad spoken o/ and ,on,ernin6 petitioner as did >ud6e Mosk" t3at su,3 5uror not onl- s3ould but 4ould be dis0uali/ied" not4it3standin6 t3at su,3 5uror s3ould assert 3is abilit- and 4illin6ness to 6ive to t3e parties a /air and impartial trial. :s to t3e ,3ara,ter o/ bias and pre5udi,e 43i,3 ma- dis0uali/- a 5ud6e" see Evans v. )uperior Court% supra% and ?riggs v. )uperior Court% supra.)'b* #nder t3e t3eor- o/ t3e ,ases 5ust ,ited and t3e prin,iples t3erein stated" 4e must ,on,lude t3at as a matter o/ la4" >ud6e Mosk is dis0uali/ied be,ause 3e 3as admittedl- eApressed an opinion as to t3e la,k o/ ,redibilit- o/ t3e petitioner 3erein" and t3at" t3ere/ore" t3e latter is ,learlentitled to t3e 4rit 3e seeks. )9* =etitioner also relies upon statements made b- >ud6e Mosk as to t3e ,redibilit-

and reliabilit- o/ one Nell-" 43o appeared as a 4itness /or petitioner at t3e trial o/ a,tion numbered 4(3(41. $u,3 eApressions amounted merel- to an opinion ,on,ernin6 t3e vera,it- o/ a 4itness. 9o dis0uali/- a 5ud6e" a pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a part-. )Evans v. )uperior Court% supra% at pa6e 3'97 People v. )weet% 19 Cal.:pp.2d 392" 39% ;%5 =.2d (99<.* )10* Finall-" as 3ereto/ore indi,ated" respondents ,ontend t3at an order 3avin6 been made upon t3e ,ommen,ement o/ t3e trial" 43ereb- it 4as ordered t3at all eviden,e o//ered and re,eived at t3e trial o/ a,tion numbered 4(3(41 s3ould be deemed re,eived into eviden,e and ,onsidered" inso/ar as /363 su,3 eviden,e s3ould be ,ompetent and material" in t3e remainin6 a,tions" and all eviden,e 3avin6 been introdu,ed in a,tion numbered 4(3(41 upon t3e a//irmative de/ense" and t3e ,ourt 3avin6 announ,ed its de,ision t3ereon" and said a//irmative de/ense also 3avin6 been pleaded in a,tion numbered 4'3943" 4it3 43i,3 a,tion numbered 4'%334 4as ,onsolidated" t3at t3e de,ision rendered in ,ase numbered 4(3(41 ne,essaril- be,ame t3e de,ision upon t3e a//irmative de/ense and 4as de,isive o/ ,ase numbered 4'3943" 4it3 43i,3 a,tion numbered 4'%334 4as ,onsolidated. 93at" t3ere/ore" t3e +=etition /or C3an6e o/ >ud6e2 4as /iled too late. ?n t3is ,ontention respondents ,annot be up3eld. : ,omplete ans4er to t3eir ,laim is ,ontained in t3e statement made b- t3e trial 5ud6e at t3e in,eption o/ t3e trial o/ ,ase numbered 4(3(41" 43en" a/ter 6rantin6 petitioner@s motion to tr- t3e several ,ases in a parti,ular order" t3e ,ourt saidF +First 4ill be Bo. 4(3(417 se,ond" 4(%03(7 t3ird" 4'3943. I can not at this ti!e deter!ine whether the sa!e a''ir!ative de'ense will 6ar all three causes o' action5 and there'ore we will hear the! separately and individually.IWit3 re/eren,e to t3e time 43en ob5e,tion must be made to t3e 0uali/i,ations o/ a 5ud6e" se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure providesF +93e statement o/ a part- ob5e,tin6 to t3e 5ud6e on t3e 6round o/ 3is dis0uali/i,ation" s3all be presented at t3e earliest pra,ti,able opportunit-" a/ter 3is appearan,e and dis,over- o/ t3e /a,ts ,onstitutin6 t3e 6round o/ t3e 5ud6e@s dis0uali/i,ation" and in an- event be/ore t3e ,ommen,ement o/ t3e 3earin6 o/ an- issue o/ /a,t in t3e a,tion or pro,eedin6 be/ore su,3 5ud6e.2 ?n vie4 o/ t3e state o/ t3e re,ord as 5ust narrated" it is unne,essar- to ,onsider /urt3er respondents@ point as to t3e reasonableness o/ t3e appli,ation to dis0uali/- >ud6e Mosk" /or it is plainlto be seen t3at su,3 appli,ation 4as /iled as soon as t3e alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e 4ere as,ertained b- petitioner" and t3at t3ere ,ould not possibl- 3ave been a ,laim o/ bias and pre5udi,e made b- petitioner prior to t3e ,on,lusion o/ trial in ,ase numbered 4(3(41 be,ause an- 6rounds /or su,3 a ,laim ori6inated in" 6re4 out o/" and 4as /ounded upon t3e opinion delivered b- >ud6e Mosk in de,idin6 a,tion numbered 4(3(41. From 43at 4e 3ave 3erein stated" it /ollo4s t3at respondents@ demurrer on t3e 6round +t3at neit3er t3e petition nor an- part t3ereo/ states /a,ts su//i,ient to ,onstitute a /364 ,ause o/ a,tion /or t3e issuan,e o/ a 4rit o/ pro3ibition2 must be overruled Careho$se Convalescent #os.. v. S$.erior Co$rt, 143 Cal.(...4th 1228, 20 Cal.:.tr.3d 12,, 06 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. ,818, 2006 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 14,0,, %Cal.(... 4 -ist., 4ct 23, 2006) :s to t3e se,ond pron6" plainti//s sa- t3e- need Wroten@s deposition to R,on/irm and veri/-R 3er ,al,ulations Rin t3e same manner as ;s3e< ,al,ulated t3e ratios....R Wroten ,ould not be 3eard to ,omplain be,ause s3e R,reated t3is situation on 3er o4n. D- doin6 so" s3e 3as represented to Jespondent Court and to ;plainti//s< t3at s3e is an eApert 4it3 superior kno4led6e o/ 3o4 nursin6 sta// ratios s3ould be ,al,ulated.R 93e ar6ument is a /alla,-" and" i/ taken to its lo6i,al ,on,lusion" 4ould permit t3e deposition o/ an attorne- 43o used 3is or 3er impressions" ,on,lusions" opinions or le6al resear,3 or t3eories to assist t3e ,lient@s responses to re0uests /or admissions. Wroten is an advo,ate" not an eApert 4itness. $in,e s3e )0uite

understandabl-* 3as not been desi6nated as an eApert to testi/- at trial" 3er deposition is irrelevant" and 3er opinions are not eviden,e. )Hernandez v. Superior Court %2003) 112 Cal.(...4th 282, 2,1, 4 Cal.:.tr.3d 883 ;B?he o.inions o0 eE.erts 8ho have not *een desi!nated as trial 8itnesses are .rotected *3 the attorne3 8or5 .rod$ct r$leR<.* McE8en v. 4ccidental Li0e Ins. Co., 112 Cal. 6, 122 +. 86 %Cal. Jan 31, 1,16)

C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%* 3as in,ludedS added an ob5e,tive test" appearan,e o/ bias b- t3e statutor- aut3orit- o/ C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%*.
93e a//idavit o/ t3e 5ud6e 4as entirel- pertinent and t3e motion to strike out" as ,on,lusions" t3ose parts in 43i,3 3e dis,laimed bias and pre5udi,e 4as properl- denied be,ause 3is state o/ mind 4as t3e ver- matter in dispute" and LL3e 4as in a better position to kno4 3is o4n /eelin6s to4ard t3e plainti// t3an an-one else. Desides" it 4as 3is dut-" i/ 3e ,ould do so" to ne6ative t3e alle6ations o/ pre5udi,e under oat3 in t3e /orm o/ an a//idavit" re,itin6 3is mental attitude. )>eating v. >eating% 1%9 Cal. '54" '59" ;14' =a,. 9'4<.* =lainti//@s a//idavit s3o4s t3at a/ter rulin6 a6ainst 3er in t3e /irst trial >ud6e Wood 6ranted 3er motion /or a ne4 trial7 t3at an appeal 4as taken b- 3er opponent7 and t3at s3e prevailed over t3at opponent in t3e ,ourt o/ appeal. We /ail to see 3o4 t3ese /a,ts indi,ated an- bias or pre5udi,e on t3e part o/ t3e 5ud6e. Hn t3e ,ontrar-" t3eeviden,ed a desire to do 5usti,e 43i,3 ,aused t3e 5ud6e /rankl- to admit t3at 3is rulin6 in 6rantin6 t3e nonsuit 4as in,orre,t. LLBeAt 4e /ind t3at t3e plainti// /eared s3e 4ould not be /airl- treated on t3e se,ond trial7 but 3er state o/ mind is not eviden,e. LL$3e ,omplains t3at t3e 5ud6e 6enerall- de,ided a6ainst 3er on ob5e,tions made b- 3er ,ounsel LLbut s3e does not s3o4" nor even assert" t3at su,3 rulin6s 4ere not 6enerall- 5usti/ied. LL93ree o/ t3e /our rulin6s o/ 43i,3 s3e makes spe,i/i, ,omplaint/11 seem to 3ave been reversed b- t3e ,ourt o/ its o4n motion. We re/er to t3ose b- 43i,3 t3e privile6ed ,ommuni,ations made b- de,eased to t3ree p3-si,ians 4ere /irst admitted and t3en stri,ken out. $urel- t3ese t3in6s do not indi,ate pre5udi,e. Hn t3e ,ontrar-" t3e- eA3ibit a desire on t3e part o/ t3e ,ourt to be /air. rroneous rulin6s a6ainst a liti6ant" even 43en numerous and ,ontinuous" /orm no 6round /or a ,3ar6e o/ bias or pre5udi,e" espe,iall- 43en t3e- are sub5e,t to revie4 )Estudillo v. )ecurity Loan etc. Co.% 15( Cal. %%" ;109 =a,. ((4<7 ?urke v. Mayall% 10 Minn. 2('7 )tate v. ?ohan% 19 Nan. 2(7)tahl v. )chwartC% %' Was3. 25" ;120 =a,. (5%<7 ?ell v. ?ell% 1( ?da3o" %3%" ;111 =a,. 10'4<7 )tate v. ?arnett% 9( $. C. 422" ;(2 $. . '95<*. Bor are a 5ud6e@s eApressions o/ opinion" uttered in 43at 3e ,on,eives to be t3e dis,3ar6e o/ 3is 5udi,ial dut-" eviden,e o/ bias or pre5udi,e. ))tate v. ?ohan% 19 Nan. 2(7)tate v. Crilly% %9 Nan. (02" ;'' =a,. '01<7 E: parte =. >. air6ank Co.% 194 Fed. 9'(7 Epstein v. (nited )tates% 19% Fed. 354" ;11% C. C. :. 1'4<.* Epstein v. (nited )tates% 19% Fed. 354" ;11% C. C. :. 1'4<.* 93e veAation o/ t3e 5ud6e" and 3is remark t3at 3e did not kno4 3o4 t3e 5ur- ,ould possibl- 3ave rea,3ed su,3 a verdi,t" does not s3o4 pre5udi,e a6ainst Mrs. M, 4en. 93ese t3in6s indi,ated per3aps t3at 3e 3ad /ormed an opinion re6ardin6 t3e le6al 0uestions 43i,3 3ad been presented in t3e ,ase and in re/eren,e to t3e su//i,ien,- o/ plainti//@s proo/. LL$u,3 ,onvi,tion in t3e mind o/ t3e 5ud6e" based upon 3is a,tual observation o/ t3e 4itnesses" t3e 3earin6 o/ t3eir testimon-" and 3is kno4led6e o/ t3e la4 appli,able to su,3 ,ases does not amount to t3at pre5udi,e a6ainst a liti6ant 43i,3 t3e statute ,ontemplates as a basis /or ,3an6e o/ venue. )Western ?ank o' )cotland v. #all!an% 15 Wis. 92" 104.* :ppellant ar6ues t3at t3e demeanor o/ t3e 5ud6e" at t3e time 43en t3e verdi,t 4as

returned" 4as in,onsistent 4it3 t3e previous submission o/ t3e ,ase to t3e 5ur- a/ter den-in6 a motion /or a dire,ted verdi,t in /avor o/ de/endant. Dut su,3 in,onsisten,)i/ in,onsisten,- it be* does not prove pre5udi,e. ?t merel- indi,ates t3at upon maturer ,onsideration o/ t3e ,ase t3an t3e ,ourt 3ad 6iven at t3e time o/ t3e submission t3ereo/ to t3e 5ur- t3e 5ud6e deemed it 3is dut-" under 3is oat3" to 6rant a ne4 trial. 93e s3o4in6 o/ pre5udi,e 4as ver- sli63t" and in our opinion it 4as met so /ull- b- t3e a//idavit o/ >ud6e Wood t3at t3ere ,an be no doubt /12 o/ t3e 5ustness and propriet- o/ t3e ,ourt@s a,tion in den-in6 t3e motion made b- plainti// under se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. 93e sub5e,t o/ alle6ed dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e 3as re,entl- re,eived so /ull and ,are/ul ,onsideration in t3e matter o/ t3e Estate o' ried!an% 1'1 Cal. 431" ;153 =a,. 91(<" t3at 4e need not revie4 t3at sub5e,t ane4 4it3 an- de6ree o/ elaboration. >ud6e Wood@s su66estion t3at a motion /or a ne4 trial s3ould be made upon t3e minutes o/ t3e ,ourt 4as no more sinister in t3is ,ase t3an 4as >ud6e Cra3am@s remark to Mr. Wood4ort3 in one o/ t3e pro,eedin6s in t3e Friedman state t3at ,ounsel +s3ould not appeal2 /rom a ,ertain order. ?/ >ud6e Wood displa-ed anno-an,e at 43at seemed to 3im t3e mis,on,eption bt3e 5ur- o/ t3e e//e,t or 4ei63t o/ t3e eviden,e" 3e merel- s3o4ed 43at almost ever5ud6e o/ a trial ,ourt 3as /elt at times" -et su,3 /eelin6 4it3 re/eren,e to t3e insu//i,ien,- o/ t3e ,ase presented b- one o/ t3e liti6ants is not t3e pre5udi,e 43i,3 t3e statute makes t3e basis /or its removal to anot3er ,ourt. Fre0uentl- t3e possession o/ su,3 a /eelin6 is a proo/ o/ t3e le6al learnin6 and t3e sense o/ 5usti,e o/ t3e presidin6 5urist 43o 3arbors it.

;no4 ,ontravened b- aut3orit- o/ ,.,.p. 1'0.1)a*)%*" 4it3 ob5e,tive test o/ reasonable person< Dias determined b- 5ust pre5ud6ment" or pre5ud6ment 4it3in ,onteAt o/ 6ender bias" or 4it3in t3e ,onteAt o/ anot3er bias.
Est$dillo v. Sec$rit3 Loan " ?r$st Co. o0 So$thern Cali0ornia, 128 Cal. 66, 10, +. 884 %Cal. J$n 22, 1,10)

C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%* 3as in,ludedS added an ob5e,tive test" appearan,e o/ bias b- t3e statutor- aut3orit- o/ C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%*. ;no4 ,ontravened baut3orit- o/ C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%*" 4it3 ob5e,tive test o/ reasonable person< #n,lear ,ase as to distin6uis3in6 errors o/ la4. W3imisi,al disre6ard o/ a statutor- s,3eme" animosit-" appearan,e o/ bias" stated in HernandeI v. $uperior Court7 :l3usain- v. $uperior Court.
?!.&CH:BC HF 8 B# &D?:$ HF >#!C &CHBFL?C9?BC :FF?!:8?9$&:== :L. :n order re/usin6 a ,3an6e o/ venue" re0uested on t3e 6round o/ t3e alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e o/ t3e trial 5ud6e" 4ill not be revie4ed on appeal" LL43en t3e statements ,ontained in t3e movin6 a//idavits tendin6 to s3o4 bias are /ull- met b- ,ounter a//idavits. #nder su,3 ,ir,umstan,es" t3e /indin6 o/ t3e trial 5ud6e" on t3e 0uestion o/ 3is o4n dis0uali/i,ation" is ,on,lusive on appeal. ?!.& JJHB H#$ J#L?BC$ BH9 CHBCL#$?8 HF D?:$. 93e /a,t t3at t3e 5ud6e" durin6 t3e ,ourse o/ t3e trial" made errors in rulin6 adversel- to t3e part- seekin6 t3e ,3an6e o/ venue" is not alone su//i,ient to s3o4 bias on 3is part. ?!.&MH9?HB HB M?B#9 $ HF CH#J9&BH9?C HF MH9?HB&$= C?F?C:9?HB$ HF =:J9?C#L:J$. W3ere a motion /or a ne4 trial is made on t3e minutes o/ t3e ,ourt" t3e noti,e o/ t3e motion must spe,i/- t3e parti,ulars in 43i,3 t3e eviden,e is insu//i,ient" i/ su,3

insu//i,ien,- be a 6round o/ motion" and must spe,i/- t3e parti,ular errors o/ la4 upon 43i,3 t3e movin6 part- 4ill rel-7 in t3e absen,e o/ su,3 spe,i/i,ations" t3e 0uestion o/ t3e su//i,ien,- o/ t3e eviden,e and errors o/ la4 4ill not be revie4ed on appeal. ?!.&$ 99?BC :$?! >#!?C?:L $:L FHJ FJ:#!& W#?9:DL ?$$# $ 9J?:DL DK >#!C &>#JK 9J?:L&F?B!?BC$ FHJ ! F B!:B9. :n a,tion to set aside a /ore,losure sale /or /raud" in 43i,3 t3e ans4er denied t3e alle6ations o/ /raud" is one appealin6 to t3e e0uit- side o/ t3e ,ourt" in 43i,3 t3e plainti// is not" o/ ri63t" entitled to a 5ur- trial. ?n su,3 a,tion" it is proper /or t3e ,ourt" 4it3out a 5ur-" to tr- t3e e0uitable issues involved in t3e 0uestion o/ /raud. #pon determinin6 su,3 issues in /avor o/ t3e de/endant" t3e plainti// 4ould not be entitled to an- relie/" re6ardless o/ an- le6al issues presented b- t3e ,omplaint. ?/ t3e ,ourt in its /indin6s also attempted to dispose o/ su,3 le6al issues" t3e error 4ould be 4it3out pre5udi,e. :== :L /rom ,ertain orders o/ t3e $uperior Court o/ Jiverside Count- made a/ter 5ud6ment. Frank F. Hster" >ud6e presidin6. 93e /a,ts are stated in t3e opinion o/ t3e ,ourt. $LH$$" >. : 5ud6ment in /avor o/ de/endants" entered upon t3e sustainin6 o/ t3eir demurrer to t3e ,omplaint" 4as reversed b- t3is ,ourt. )Estudillo v. )ecurity L. < #. Co.% 149 Cal. 55%" ;(' =a,. 19<.* #pon t3e return o/ t3e ,ause to t3e lo4er ,ourt an ans4er 4as /iled and a trial 3ad" resultin6 in a se,ond 5ud6ment /or t3e de/endants. 93e plainti//s appeal /rom t3ree orders made a/ter t3is 5ud6ment.

:not3er o/ t3e appeals is /rom an order re/usin6 a ,3an6e o/ venue. 93e motion to t3is end 4as made a/ter t3e trial and 5ud6ment" and pendin6 pro,eedin6s on motion /or a ne4 trial. ?t 4as based upon t3e alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e o/ >ud6e Hster. We do not deem it ne,essar- to set /ort3 t3e averments o/ t3e a//idavits upon 43i,3 plainti//s relied to support t3is motion. ?/ t3e- ,ontained an- statements tendin6 to s3o4 bias on t3e part o/ t3e 5ud6e" t3ese statements 4ere /ull- met b- ,ounter a//idavits. 93e /indin6 o/ t3e trial 5ud6e on ,on/li,tin6 a//idavits is ,on,lusive on appeal" even t3ou63 t3e 0uestion in ,ontrovers- be t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ t3e 5ud6e 3imsel/. ))wan v. #al6ot% 152 Cal. 142" ;94 =a,. 23(<.* 93e un,ontradi,ted matter ,onsisted merel- o/ a re,ital o/ t3e pro,eedin6s prior to and durin6 t3e trial" in t3e ,ourse o/ 43i,3 >ud6e Hster made a number o/ rulin6s adversel- to t3e plainti//@s ,ontentions. We are not prepared to ,on,ede t3at all or an- o/ t3ese rulin6s 4ere erroneous. Dut i/ it be assumed t3at in ea,3 o/ t3em t3e trial ,ourt ,ommitted error" t3at /a,t alone 4ould not be su//i,ient to s3o4 bias on 3is part. 93e re,ord is devoid o/ t3e sli63test indi,ation t3at >ud6e Hster 3ad an- relations" outside o/ t3e trial" 4it3 an- o/ t3e parties" t3at 3e entertained an- /eelin6s o/ 3ostilit- or /riends3ip to4ard an- o/ t3em" or t3at 3e 3ad" eA,ept in t3e ,ourse o/ orderl- 5udi,ial pro,edure" 6iven utteran,e to an- eApressions ,on,ernin6 t3e merits o/ t3e ,ase. 93e s3o4in6 4as entirel- insu//i,ient to re0uire t3e 6rantin6 o/ t3e motion. :3an v. elte, 81 Cal.(...2d 888, 1,8 +.2d 321 %Cal.(... 1 -ist. 4ct 13, 1,48)

C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%* 3as in,ludedS added an ob5e,tive test" appearan,e o/ bias b- t3e statutor- aut3orit- o/ C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%*. ;no4 ,ontravened baut3orit- o/ C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%*" 4it3 ob5e,tive test o/ reasonable person< #n,lear ,ase as to distin6uis3in6 errors o/ la4.

W3imisi,al disre6ard o/ a statutor- s,3eme" animosit-" appearan,e o/ bias" stated in HernandeI v. $uperior Court7 :l3usain- v. $uperior Court.
%1) >ud6es M 55.1&&!is0uali/i,ation&&=ro,eedin6s&&:ns4er o/ >ud6e. #nder Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5" aut3oriIin6 a 5ud6e a,,used o/ bias and pre5udi,e to /ile an ans4er and re0uirin6 t3at su,3 ans4er +s3all be veri/ied b- oat3 in t3e manner pres,ribed b- se,tion 44% o/ t3is ,ode /or t3e veri/i,ation o/ pleadin6s"2 an ans4er in t3e /orm o/ an a//idavit and s4orn to be/ore a notar- publi, is su//i,ient. $ee 14 Cal.J$r. (2(. %2) >ud6es M %2&&!is0uali/i,ation&&=ro,eedin6s&&:ppeal. Findin6s b- a 5ud6e assi6ned to 3ear ob5e,tions o/ a plainti// t3at t3e trial 5ud6e 4as dis0uali/ied to tr- a ,ase be,ause o/ bias and pre5udi,e" are bindin6 on an appellate ,ourt 43ere t3e /indin6s 4ere made on ,on/li,tin6 statements in t3e ob5e,tions o/ plainti// and in t3e ans4er o/ t3e trial 5ud6e. %3) >ud6es M 4%)5*&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Dias and =re5udi,e. LL: 4ron6 opinion on t3e la4 o/ a ,ase does not dis0uali/- a 5ud6e" nor does it s3o4 bias or pre5udi,e. $ee 14 Cal.J$r. (197 30 (6.J$r. '(3. %4) >ud6es M 5%&&!is0uali/i,ation&&=ro,eedin6s&&Durden o/ =roo/. 93e burden o/ provin6 bias or pre5udi,e on t3e part o/ a trial 5ud6e is on t3e ,omplainin6 part-. %2) >ud6es M 4%)5*&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Dias and =re5udi,e. : statement b- t3e trial 5ud6e t3at in 3is opinion t3e plainti// ,ould not state a ,ause o/ a,tion be,ause t3e alle6ed a6reement must be in 4ritin6 and be,ause t3e probate ,ourt alone 3ad 5urisdi,tion o/ t3e matters set /ort3 in t3e ,omplaints" are opinions as to 0uestions o/ la4" and an- error o/ t3e 5ud6e on 0uestions o/ la4" no matter 3o4 6ross" does not ,onstitute bias or pre5udi,e nor dis0uali/- 3im to pro,eed 4it3 t3e trial o/ t3e ,ase in 43i,3 su,3 error is made. %6) >ud6es M 4%)3*&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Dias and =re5udi,e. 93e a,tion o/ t3e trial 5ud6e in strikin6 /rom t3e ,lerk@s trans,ript on appeal matters additional to t3e pleadin6s on t3e pro,eedin6s to dis0uali/- 3im" su,3 as t3e ot3er pleadin6s" t3e minute orders s3o4in6 t3e ,ourt@s a,tion t3ereon" a motion /or sta- o/ pro,eedin6s" and t3e minute order s3o4in6 denial t3ereo/" does not s3o4 bias or pre5udi,e even i/ t3e 5ud6e erroneousl- t3ou63t t3at t3e onl- re,ords t3e appellate ,ourt needs are t3ose dire,tl- used in t3e pro,eedin6s to dis0uali/-. %1) >ud6es M 5%)2*&&!is0uali/i,ation&&=ro,eedin6s&& viden,e. ?n a pro,eedin6 to dis0uali/- a 5ud6e" oral eviden,e need not be re,eived to prove t3e matters set /ort3 in t3e a//idavits. $#MM:JK :== :L /rom an order o/ t3e $uperior Court o/ $an Mateo Count- overrulin6 ob5e,tions to a 3earin6 o/ an a,tion b- t3e trial 5ud6e. Clark Clement" >ud6e assi6ned. ://irmed. CH#B$: L L. L. >ames and Carl . !a- /or :ppellant. J. >. !ol4i6 and :ntonio >. Caudio /or Jespondents. DJ:K" >. :ppeal FB1 /rom order overrulin6 plainti//@s ob5e,tions to a 3earin6 o/ an a,tion to establis3 a trust" and to t3e trial o/ an- issue o/ /a,t b- Honorable :-lett J. Cotton.

FB1 Consolidated 4it3 t3e appeal /rom 5ud6ment on t3e pleadin6s rendered b>ud6e Cotton in /avor o/ de/endants. $ee Bo. 13'03" post% p. (9' ;19( =.2d 35'<. Hn Bovember 1%" 194%" plainti// /iled a ,omplaint a6ainst de/endants in t3e $uperior Court o/ $an Mateo Count-" to establis3 a trust in 3is /avor as to an undivided 3al/ interest in t3e estate o/ !aniel M,$4eene-" de,eased" t3en in ,ourse o/ probate in t3e same ,ourt. 93e ,ase 4as assi6ned to t3e department in 43i,3 >ud6e Cotton re6ularlpresided. Hn !e,ember 9" 194%" de/endants demurred 6enerall- and spe,i/i,all- to t3e ,omplaint. 93e demurrer 4as ar6ued" brie/ed and submitted and on Mar,3 %" 194'" >ud6e Cotton ordered +!emurrer sustained" ten da-s to amend. =robate Court 3as eA,lusive 5urisdi,tion. Complaint /ails to state a ,ause o/ a,tion.2 Hn Mar,3 1(" 194'" plainti// /iled an amended ,omplaint" substantiall- t3e same as t3e ori6inal ,omplaint" to 43i,3 de/endants a6ain 6enerall- and spe,iall- demurred. 93is demurrer 4as sustained b- >ud6e Cotton. Later" a se,ond amended ,omplaint 4as /iled" a6ain substantiall- t3e same as t3e /irst ,omplaint" to 43i,3 >ud6e Cotton sustained a demurrer 4it3out leave to amend. Hn Mar,3 31" and be/ore t3e 3earin6 on t3e demurrer to t3e /irst amended ,omplaint" plainti//" pursuant to se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure" ,ommen,ed t3ese pro,eedin6s to dis0uali/- >ud6e Cotton /rom /urt3er parti,ipation /8,0 in t3e ,ase" on t3e 6rounds o/ alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e" b- /ilin6 +Hb5e,tions to Hearin6 o/ Matter b- Honorable :-lett J. Cotton.2 >ud6e Cotton /iled an +:ns4er to Hb5e,tions2 LLto 43i,3 a repl- 4as /iled b- plainti//@s attorne-" >ames. Honorable Clark Clement 4as assi6ned to 3ear t3e ob5e,tions" and a/ter a 3earin6" 3e overruled plainti//@s ob5e,tions. 93is appeal is /rom t3at order. ?n 3is noti,e to prepare trans,ript" plainti// re0uested t3e in,lusion" in addition to t3e pleadin6s on t3e pro,eedin6s to dis0uali/-" o/ all t3e ot3er pleadin6s and t3e minute orders o/ >ud6e Cotton. 93ese 4ere in,luded in t3e trans,ript" but on motion o/ de/endants" >ud6e Cotton ordered t3ese additional matters stri,ken /rom t3e trans,ript. :n appli,ation to t3is ,ourt /or au6mentation o/ t3e re,ord" to in,lude t3ese matters" 4as 6ranted" and t3e entire re,ord is no4 be/ore t3is ,ourt. =lainti// ,ontends" /irst" t3at t3e ans4er /iled b- >ud6e Cotton 4as unveri/ied and t3ere/ore ,onstituted an admission o/ t3e ,3ar6es o/ bias and pre5udi,e made bplainti// in 3is veri/ied ob5e,tions7 and t3at t3e re,ord s3o4s t3at plainti// ,annot 3ave a /air and impartial trial be/ore >ud6e Cotton. :ns4er Was $u//i,ient )1* 93e ans4er o/ >ud6e Cotton /iled on :pril 3 did not ,ontain a veri/i,ation. ?t 4as in t3e /orm o/ an a//idavit and s4orn to be/ore a notar- publi,. ?n t3e replt3ereto o/ :ttorne- >ames" /iled on :pril 10t3" t3e ,ontention 4as made t3at t3e ans4er did not ,onstitute an ans4er in la4" be,ause it 4as unveri/ied. Hn :pril 1't3" >ud6e Cotton subs,ribed to a veri/i,ation" 43i,3 in t3e trans,ript /ollo4s t3e ans4er /iled on :pril 10t3. ?t bears no /ilin6 mark. $ubdivision 5 o/ se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure provides t3at in a pro,eedin6 o/ t3is kind t3e 5ud6e ma- /ile 3is ans4er 4it3in /ive da-s a/ter t3e /ilin6 o/ t3e ob5e,tions" and t3at su,3 ans4er +s3all 6e veri'ied b- oat3 in t3e manner pres,ribed b- se,tion 44% o/ t3is ,ode /or t3e veri/i,ation o/ pleadin6s.2 ) mp3asis added.* =lainti// ,ontends t3at be,ause 3is ans4er 4as unveri/ied" >ud6e Cotton" under t3e aut3orit- o/ Bosen'ield v. &osper% '0 Cal.:pp.2d 21' ;1%0 =.2d (42<" 43i,3 3olds t3at t3e re0uirement o/ /ilin6 an ans4er 4it3in /ive da-s is mandator-" be,ame automati,all- dis0uali/ied. We a6ree 4it3 t3e position taken b- t3e

,ourt in t3at ,ase" /or 43ile it 3eld t3at t3e /ive&da- re0uirement is mandator-" it also re5e,ted an ob5e,tion to t3e plainti//@s a//idavit not bein6 veri/ied but in t3e identi,al /orm o/ t3e /8,1 one 3ere" and 3eld t3at a notariIed a//idavit is su//i,ient ,omplian,e 4it3 se,tion 1'0" and +in /orm more /or,e/ul t3an t3e oat3 made in t3e veri/i,ation.2 )=. 224.* LLMoreover" as 3erea/ter pointed out" plainti//@s o4n pleadin6s do not s3o4 bias or pre5udi,e. Was >ud6e Cotton !is0uali/iedO )2* 9o determine t3is 0uestion re0uires an anal-sis primaril- o/ t3e statements ,ontained in t3e ob5e,tions o/ plainti// and t3e repl- o/ :ttorne- >ames. 93ere is a ,on/li,t bet4een t3em and t3e ans4er o/ >ud6e Cotton as to t3e ,onversations bet4een t3e 5ud6e and :ttorne- >ames" 43i,3 t3e trial 5ud6e" >ud6e Clement" resolved in /avor o/ >ud6e Cotton. #nder 4ell&establis3ed rules FB1 t3is ,ourt is bound b- >ud6e Clement@s /indin6s on su,3 ,on/li,t. Ho4ever" disre6ardin6 entirel- >ud6e Cotton@s repl-" t3e s3o4in6 made b- plainti// 4as not su//i,ient to establis3 an- bias" pre5udi,e or dis0uali/i,ation o/ t3e 5ud6e. FB1 $ee >reling v. )uperior Court% %3 Cal.:pp.2d 353 ;14% =.2d 935<. : statement o/ t3e ,ause o/ a,tion alle6ed in t3e ,omplaints /iled b- plainti// is set /ort3 in t3e opinion on t3e main appeal 3ereto/ore re/erred to. ?t is unne,essar- to detail it 3ere. ?t is su//i,ient to sa- t3at plainti//@s ,ause o/ a,tion is to establis3 a trust in /avor o/ plainti// in ,ertain real properties" based on an oral a6reement alle6ed to 3ave been made b- t3e de,edent" o/ 43ose estate de/endants are eAe,utor and eAe,utriA respe,tivel-. !e/endants are also 5oined in t3eir individual ,apa,ities" be,ause under t3e 4ill o/ !aniel M,$4eene-" made in ,laimed violation o/ t3e oral a6reement upon 43i,3 t3e alle6ed trust is based" t3e- 4ill re,eive" and under deeds made b- !aniel to t3em in 3is li/etime" in ,laimed violation o/ said a6reement" t3e- 3ave alread- re,eived" some o/ t3e properties upon 43i,3 plainti// is endeavorin6 to impress a trust. 93e substan,e o/ plainti//@s ob5e,tions /ollo4sF :/ter >ud6e Cotton 3ad sustained t3e demurrer to t3e ori6inal ,omplaint" :ttorne- >ames ,alled upon 3im in 3is ,3ambers +and stated t3at" in vie4 o/ t3e /a,t t3at permission 3ad been 6ranted to amend plainti//@s ,omplaint 3e 4as un,ertain in 43at respe,ts t3e amendments s3ould be made in vie4 o/ t3e /a,t t3at t3e order sustainin6 demurrer" a,,ordin6 to t3e 4ritten noti,e t3ereo/" 4as based" at least in part" on t3e t3eor- t3at t3e =robate Court 3ad eA,lusive 5urisdi,tion. 93at t3ereupon said Honorable :-lett J. Cotton stated t3at plainti// 3ad no ,ause o/ a,tion" t3at t3e plainti// ,ould not amend 3is ,omplaint /8,2 to satis/- said 5ud6e7 t3at i/ an amended ,omplaint 4as /iled 3e 4ould sustain an- demurrer interposed t3ereto" t3at plainti// 3ad no ri63t to re,over be,ause an a6reement su,3 as alle6ed in plainti//@s ,omplaint 4as re0uired to be in 4ritin67 and t3at 6rantin6 t3e ri63t to amend t3e ,omplaint 4as a ,ourtes- onl-.2 :/ter plainti// /iled 3is /irst amended ,omplaint" :ttorne- >ames a6ain ,alled upon t3e 5ud6e" and +stated t3at" in vie4 o/ said 5ud6e@s /iAed opinion in t3is matter and 3is statement t3at 3e 4ould sustain an- demurrer interposed to said /irst amended ,omplaint" it 4as idle /or plainti// to pro,eed 4it3 t3e ,ase be/ore said Honorable :-lett J. Cotton" and re0uested t3at some ot3er 5ud6e be ,alled in to 3ear t3e ar6uments on an- demurrer interposed to said /irst amended ,omplaint" and also 3ear all subse0uent matters in said a,tion7 and t3at said Honorable :-lett J. Cotton re/used to ,all in some ot3er 5ud6e" statin6 t3at 43at 3e 3ad previousl- said 4it3 re/eren,e to said a,tion" and t3e merits t3ereo/" @is m- opinion.@ 2 93e repl- o/ :ttorne- >ames" a/ter den-in6 ,ertain portions o/ >ud6e Cotton@s versions o/ t3e ,onversations as 6iven in t3e ans4er" avers t3at t3e 5ud6e +stated ,ate6ori,all- t3at an a6reement su,3 as t3at pleaded 3ad to be in 4ritin62 and t3at

>ud6e Cotton +reiterates 3is opinion t3at t3e a6reement upon 43i,3 plainti//@s ,omplaint is based must be in 4ritin6" alt3ou63 t3e $upreme Court o/ t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia 3as une0uivo,all- 3eld to t3e ,ontrar- in t3e ,ase o/ =otten v. Mensing% 3 Cal.2d 4%9 ;45 =.2d 19(<" as 4as pointed out to said Honorable :-lett J. Cotton at t3e time o/ t3e 3earin6 o/ t3e demurrer to plainti//@s ,omplaint 3erein. 93at said Honorable :-lett J. Cotton in 3is ans4er /iled 3erein does not den- t3at 3e entertains t3e vie4 t3at in an a,tion su,3 as t3at set /ort3 in plainti//@s ,omplaint" t3e =robate Court 3as eA,lusive 5urisdi,tion7 ... LL93at plainti// and 3is ,ounsel /eel t3at in vie4 o/ t3e de/inite opinion o/ Honorable :-lett J. Cotton" ,ontrar- to t3e positive de,isions o/ t3e $upreme Court o/ Cali/ornia" and t3e anta6onisti, attitude taken b- said >ud6e" plainti// 4ill pro,eed 4it3 said a,tion be/ore said >ud6e under a 6reat initial 3andi,ap" to 43i,3 3e s3ould not be sub5e,ted7 t3at t3e ,ourt de,isions re/erred to 3erein 3ave all been ,ited to said Honorable :-lett J. Cotton 3ereto/ore" and t3at in all likeli3ood t3e- 4ould not no4 ,ause 3im to ,3an6e 3is opinion7 and t3at b- reason o/ t3e /ilin6 b- t3e plainti// 3erein o/ 3is ob5e,tions to said >ud6e /8,3 3earin6 said matter t3e pre5udi,e o/ said Honorable :-lett J. Cotton 4ill be intensi/ied.2 93ere is no ,laim in an- part o/ t3e re,ord t3at >ud6e Cotton 3as an- pre5udi,e a6ainst plainti//" an- o/ t3e attorne-s /or plainti//" an- o/ plainti//@s 4itnesses" or bias in /avor o/ an- o/ t3e de/endants" t3eir la4-ers" or t3eir 4itnesses. LL?t is plain t3at >ud6e Cotton 4as o/ t3e opinion t3at on t3e /a,ts set /ort3 in t3e various ,omplaints plainti// ,ould not state a ,ause o/ a,tion" be,ause in 3is opinion t3e probate ,ourt alone 3ad 5urisdi,tion o/ t3e sub5e,t matter" and be,ause t3e t-pe o/ a6reement upon 43i,3 plainti// relied 3ad to be in 4ritin6 to be le6al. :s s3o4n in our de,ision on t3e main appeal" plainti// is ,orre,t in 3is ,ontention t3at t3e 5ud6e@s opinion on t3ese matters 4as erroneous. )3* Ho4ever" a 4ron6 opinion on t3e la4 o/ a ,ase does not dis0uali/- a 5ud6e" nor is it an- eviden,e o/ bias or pre5udi,e. ?/ so" no 5ud6e 43o is reversed b- a 3i63er ,ourt on an- rulin6 or de,ision 4ould ever be 0uali/ied to pro,eed /urt3er in t3e parti,ular ,ase. W3ere a 5ud6e is mistaken as to 0uestions o/ la4" a liti6ant ,annot substitute /or 3is remedb- appeal" pro,eedin6s /or t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e /or alle6ed bias and pre5udi,e. )4* 93e burden o/ provin6 bias or pre5udi,e is upon t3e ,omplainin6 part-. )"olish v. einstein% 123 Cal.:pp. 54' ;11 =.2d (93<.* :s stated in >reling v. )uperior Court% supra% pa6e 359F +: 5ud6e is not dis0uali/ied to a6ain 3ear a ,ase be,ause o/ an eApression o/ opinion b- 3im upon a 0uestion o/ la4. ... rroneous rulin6s a6ainst a liti6ant" even 43en numerous and ,ontinuous" /orm no 6round /or a ,3ar6e o/ bias and pre5udi,e" espe,iall- 43en t3e- are sub5e,t to revie4 on appeal. =etitioner@s ,laim t3at t3e ,ondu,t and statements o/ t3e 5ud6e indi,ate t3at 3e 3ad /ormed an opinion re6ardin6 t3e le6al 0uestions 43i,3 3ad been presented in t3e ,ase does not entitle 3im to a ,3an6e o/ 5ud6e" /or it does not measure up to t3at pre5udi,e a6ainst a liti6ant 43i,3 t3e statute ,ontemplates as a basis /or dis0uali/-in6 a 5ud6e ... 43ile it ma- ,onstitute su//i,ient 6round /or a reversal o/ t3e 5ud6ment" ;it< 4ill not support a ,3ar6e o/ dis0uali/i,ation under se,tion 1'0 o/ t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. )Evans v. )uperior Court% supra ;10' Cal.:pp. 3'2 )290 =. %%2*<.*2 =lainti// ,ites a number o/ ,ases 43i,3 3e ,laims support 3is ,ontention t3at >ud6e Cotton 4as biased and pre5udi,ed. ?n not one o/ t3em 4as t3ere a situation 43ere t3e onl- ,laim /8,4 o/ bias and pre5udi,e 4as be,ause o/ t3e 5ud6e@s in,orre,t vie4 o/ t3e la4. ?n >reling v. )uperior Court% supra% t3e 5ud6e 3ad eApressed an opinion as to t3e la,k o/ ,redibilit- o/ t3e petitioner. LL?n Evans v. )uperior Court% 10' Cal.:pp. 3'2 ;290 =. %%2<" t3e 5ud6e eApressed a positive opinion as to t3e ,redibilit- o/ a ,ertain 4itness" likenin6 3im to a +Mor6an or a Nidd.2 ?n Bugenstein v. $ttenhei!er )1915*" '( Hre. 3'1 ;152 =. 215" :nn.Cas. 191' 953<" t3e 5ud6e stated t3at 3e 4ould see t3at t3e t3ird trial o/ t3e ,ase 4ould be be/ore 3im +:nd ? 4ill see

t3at t3e 4oman ;plainti//< 6ets anot3er verdi,t and 5ud6ment t3at 4ill stand.2 )=. 21% ;152 =.<.* ?n Pratt v. Pratt% 141 Cal. 24' ;'4 =. '42<" t3e 5ud6e in an a,tion /or a,,ountin6 bet4een 3usband and 4i/e stated" in e//e,t" t3at i/ t3e de/endant 3usband ,alled t3e dau63ter o/ t3e parties as a 4itness in 3is be3al/" it 4ould ,ondemn 3im in t3e e-es o/ t3e ,ourt" and +Kou 4ould 3ave to bolster ever-t3in6 3e )de/endant* said to make me believe an-t3in6 a/ter 3e did t3at.2 )=. 250.* ?n ?riggs v. )uperior Court% 215 Cal. 33% ;10 =.2d 53<" t3e ,ourt /ound t3at t3e remarks admittedl- made b- t3e trial ,ourt ,ould be reasonabl- interpreted onl- as meanin6 t3at t3e petitioners +3ad deliberatel- misstated t3e trut3 in t3eir a//idavit" and t3at 3e ,3ar6ed t3em 4it3 3avin6 done so2 )p. 345* and t3ere/ore it 4as not 3umanlpossible /or t3e 5ud6e to pass upon t3eir ,redibilit- 4it3 an impartial mind. ?n Chastain v. )uperior Court% 14 Cal.:pp.2d 9' ;5' =.2d 9(2<" t3e pro,eedin6 4as to prevent t3e trial 5ud6e /rom 3earin6 a personal in5ur- a,tion /or t3e t3ird time. 93e 5ud6e admitted t3at in 6rantin6 ne4 trials 3e 3ad stated t3at one o/ t3e de/endants and some o/ 3is 4itnesses 3ad per5ured t3emselves at t3e /ormer trials and t3at 3e 4as still o/ t3e same opinion. Bosen'ield v. &osper% 45 Cal.:pp.2d 3%5 ;114 =.2d 29<" 4as an a,tion /or t3e reasonable value o/ le6al servi,es. !urin6 t3e trial" t3e 5ud6e apparentl- 4as impatient 4it3 t3e time taken to tr- t3e ,ase. Hn t3e /i/t3 da- t3e 5ud6e ,alled ,ounsel into 3is ,3ambers and su66ested to plainti//@s attorne- t3at 3e o//er a ,ertain sum" mu,3 less t3an t3at sued /or" in settlement o/ t3e a,tion. W3en t3e attorne- ,onsented" t3e 5ud6e t3en told t3e attorne- /or de/endants" + @9ell -our ,lients t3at in m- opinion it 4ould be to t3eir best interests to settle on t3at basis.@ 2 )=. 3'0.* LL93e $upreme Court 3eld t3at t3ereb- t3e 5ud6e 4as /ormin6 and eApressin6 an opinion /8,2 on issues o/ /a,t be/ore t3e ,ase 4as /inall- submitted to 3im" and 3en,e dis0uali/-in6 3imsel/ /rom pro,eedin6 /urt3er 4it3 t3e trial. )tate e: rel ?arnard v. ?oard o' Education% 19 Was3. ( ;52 =. 31'" %' :m.$t.Jep. '0%" 40 L.J.:. 31'<" is also ,ited b- plainti//. ?ts inappli,abilit- is easil- seen /rom its /a,ts. C3ar6es 4ere /iled be/ore t3e board o/ trustees o/ a s,3ool distri,t a6ainst t3e superintendent o/ s,3ools. 93e latter ,laimed t3at one board member 4as dis0uali/ied /rom 3earin6 t3e ,3ar6es be,ause admittedl- 3e 3ad publi,l- announ,ed 3is intention to vote to /ind t3e superintendent 6uilt-" no !atter what the evidence !ight 6e. )5* 93e most t3at ,an be said o/ plainti//@s ,3ar6es a6ainst >ud6e Cotton is t3at in t3e /a,e o/ ,on,lusive aut3orities to t3e ,ontrar-" t3e 5ud6e in an abrupt and violent manner stated t3at in 3is opinion t3e plainti// ,ould not state a ,ause o/ a,tion be,ause t3e alle6ed a6reement must be in 4ritin6 and be,ause t3e probate ,ourt alone 3ad 5urisdi,tion o/ t3e matters set /ort3 in t3e ,omplaints. 93ese are" 3o4ever" opinions as to 0uestions o/ la4. LL=lainti// 3as ,ited no ,ase" and 4e are unable to /ind an-" 43i,3 3olds t3at a 5ud6e@s error in 0uestions o/ la4" no matter 3o4 6ross" ,onstitutes bias or pre5udi,e or is a dis0uali/i,ation to pro,eed 4it3 t3e trial o/ t3e ,ase in 43i,3 su,3 error 4as made. )%* 93e a,tion o/ >ud6e Cotton" at t3e re0uest o/ de/endants" in strikin6 /rom t3e ,lerk@s trans,ript on appeal" t3e pleadin6s" t3e minute orders s3o4in6 t3e ,ourt@s a,tion t3ereon" t3e motion /or sta- o/ pro,eedin6s" and t3e minute order s3o4in6 denial t3ereo/" does not s3o4 bias or pre5udi,e. LL videntl- t3e 5ud6e erroneouslt3ou63t t3at t3e onl- re,ords t3is ,ourt needs on an appeal o/ t3is kind are t3ose dire,tl- used in t3e pro,eedin6s to dis0uali/-. W3ile 6enerall- it is better to stapro,eedin6s until t3e appeal upon t3e 0uestion o/ t3e 5ud6e@s alle6ed dis0uali/i,ation is determined" it sometimes 3appens t3at pro,eedin6s o/ t3is kind are brou63t merel/or dela-" and t3e 5ud6e" 43o t3ou63t t3at 3e 4as ri63t upon t3e 0uestions o/ la4" ma3ave t3ou63t t3at su,3 4as t3e purpose o/ t3e pro,eedin6s 3ere. We 3asten to add t3at

4e are satis/ied t3at su,3 4as not t3e purpose o/ plainti// or 3is ,ounsel" but t3at t3e- a,ted in 6ood /ait3. Ho4ever" t3e denial o/ t3e motion to sta-" even ,oupled 4it3 t3e erroneous a,tion o/ t3e 5ud6e upon t3e demurrers" does not make it +appear probable t3at" b- reason o/ bias or pre5udi,e o/ su,3 ... 5ud6e ... a /air and impartial trial ,annot /8,6 be 3ad be/ore 3im.2 )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.*We ,annot assume" as plainti// 4ould 3ave us do" t3at >ud6e Cotton" a/ter our de,ision on t3e main appeal" 4ill ,ontinue to 3old t3at t3e /a,ts alle6ed do not ,onstitute a valid ,ause o/ a,tion. ?/ su,3 s3ould o,,ur an appeal /rom t3at 5ud6ment is an ade0uate remed-. Counsel /or plainti// ar6ue t3at a reversal in t3e main ,ase 4ill a//ord 3is ,lient no ade0uate remed-" be,ause" so it is asserted" 43en t3e ,ase is tried on its merits" >ud6e Cotton 4ill not ob5e,tivel- pass on t3e /a,ts but 4ill be desirous o/ up3oldin6 3is alle6ed pre,on,eived ,on,lusion t3at plainti// s3ould not prevail. We 3ave no doubt t3at in an- ,ase i/ a trial 5ud6e /eels t3at 3e ,annot ob5e,tivel- pass upon t3e ,redibilit- o/ t3e 4itnesses" somet3in6 43i,3 3e alone 4ill kno4" t3at 3e 4ill voluntaril- step aside and permit anot3er 5ud6e to tr- t3e ,ase. 7lier v. S$.erior Co$rt, 23 Cal.(...4th 162, 28 Cal.:.tr.2d 383 %Cal.(... 1 -ist. Mar 11, 1,,4)

Dad out,ome !oes t3e standard /or dis0uali/i,ation provided /or in subdivision )a*)%*)C* o/ se,tion 1'0.1 )43i,3* is /undamentall- an ob5e,tive one.2 FB4?/ a reasonable member o/ t3e publi, at lar6e" a4are o/ all t3e /a,ts" 4ould /airl- entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated. 93e eAisten,e o/ a,tual bias is not re0uired. !oes a a,tual durin6 or an5ud6e1s state o/ mind adverse to one o/ t3e parties based on upon observan,e o/ t3e 4itnesses and t3e eviden,e LL52' 3ave to o,,ur t3e trial o/ an a,tion7 Hr ,an it in,lude 3earin6s on t3e meritsO 3earin6sO

;?n $oon C3e-1s ,ase< Hearin6s ,ondu,ted in ,ourt" 4ere not 3earin6s on t3e merits or evidentiar- 3earin6s )look to C.C.=. 1'0.% availabilit-* did not ,onstitute admissible eviden,e7 in ,ontrast to t3e de,isional la4 prin,iple stated in 93e- 4ere at t3e pleadin6s sta6e.
$#MM:JK 93e superior ,ourt entered an order t3at a 5ud6e 4as dis0uali/ied under Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1" subd. )a*)%*)C* )bias and pre5udi,e*" /rom sittin6 on a ,riminal ,ase involvin6 an :/ri,an&:meri,an de/endant" based on t3at 5ud6e@s use o/ t3e term +6ood bo-2 43en addressin6 an adult male o/ :/ri,an&:meri,an des,ent durin6 t3e plea and senten,in6 pro,eedin6s in anot3er ,ase. )$uperior Court o/ Contra Costa Count-" Bo. 9340(%&0" Ja-mond !. Williamson" >r." >ud6e. FBL * 93e Court o/ :ppeal 6ranted t3e =eople@s petition /or a 4rit o/ mandate" dire,tin6 t3e lo4er ,ourt to set aside its de,ision and enter a ne4 order den-in6 t3e ,3allen6e7 it dismissed t3e 5ud6e@s related petition as moot. 93e ,ourt 3eld t3at t3e superior ,ourt erred in rulin6 t3at t3e 5ud6e 4as dis0uali/ied based solel- on t3at 5ud6e@s use o/ t3e term +6ood bo-2 in t3e prior ,ase. LLBo ob5e,tion or ot3er ,omment 4as raised b-

t3at de/endant or 3is ,ounsel 43en t3ose 4ords 4ere uttered" nor at an- ot3er time durin6 t3at pro,eedin6. Moreover" t3at de/endant not onl- pleaded 6uilt- be/ore t3e 5ud6e" 3is ne6otiated senten,in6 disposition 4as 4it3 3im" and 3e submitted to senten,in6 be/ore 3im. ?n t3e ,onteAt o/ t3e entire pro,eedin6" t3e 4ords +6ood bo-2 4ould not lead a person to reasonabl- entertain a doubt about t3e 5ud6e@s abilit- to be impartial to4ard t3e present de/endant be,ause o/ 3is ra,e or /or an- ot3er reason. Moreover" to up3old t3e dis0uali/i,ation 4ould result in t3e 5ud6e@s inabilit- to ever sit on a ,ase involvin6 a part- o/ :/ri,an&:meri,an des,ent" a t-pe o/ re,usal /or 43ole ,lasses o/ ,ases 4it3out t3e normal sa/e6uards t3at prote,t a 5ud6e /rom removal /rom o//i,e. %3) >ud6es M 1(&&!is0uali/i,ation&&=ro,eedin6s&&Hearin6 and !etermination&& Hb5e,tive $tandard. 93e standard /or dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e provided /or in Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1" subd. )a*)%*)C*" is /undamentall- an ob5e,tive one. ?/ a reasonable member o/ t3e publi, at lar6e" a4are o/ all t3e /a,ts" 4ould /airl- entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated. 93e eAisten,e o/ a,tual bias is not re0uired. W3ile t3e ob5e,tive standard ,learl- indi,ates t3at t3e de,ision on dis0uali/i,ation not be based on t3e 5ud6e@s personal vie4 o/ 3is or 3er o4n impartialit-" it also su66ests t3at t3e liti6ants@ ne,essaril- partisan vie4s do not provide t3e appli,able /rame o/ re/eren,e. 93e /a,ts and ,ir,umstan,es promptin6 t3e ,3allen6e must be evaluated as o/ t3e time t3e motion is brou63t and t3e evaluation o/ t3e ,3allen6e must not isolate /a,ts or ,omments out o/ ,onteAt. 93e ,3allen6e must be to t3e e//e,t t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould not be able to be impartial to4ard a parti,ular part-. Mo$lton 'i!$el ater -ist. v. Colo6*o, 111 Cal.(...4th 1210, 4 Cal.:.tr.3d 21,, 03 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 82,,, 2003 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 10,33, %Cal.(... 4 -ist. Se. 10, 2003)

Dad out,ome" but an eAample o/ a 5ud6e1s state o/ mind adverse to one o/ t3e parties based on upon a,tual observan,e o/ t3e 4itnesses and t3e eviden,e LL52' 6iven durin6 t3e trial o/ an a,tion.
;4< Co$rts 106 10% Courts 10%?? ,1%1) stablis3ment" Hr6aniIation" and =ro,edure 10%??)C* Jules o/ !e,ision 10%k(( =revious !e,isions as Controllin6 or as =re,edents 10%k91 !e,isions o/ Hi63er Court or Court o/ Last Jesort 10%k91)1* k. Hi63est :ppellate Court. Most Cited

Cases Court o/ :ppeal is re0uired to /ollo4 pre,edents set b- de,isions o/ $upreme Court" re6ardless o/ 43et3er t3ere are dissents. ;,< J$d!es 221 4,%2)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k49 Dias and =re5udi,e 22'k49)2* k. $tatements and Apressions o/ Hpinion b- >ud6e. Most Cited Cases >ud6e 43o presided over ,ondemnation trial 4as not sub5e,t to dis0uali/i,ation /or bias7 3is statements durin6 trial" in,ludin6 3istori,al overvie4 o/ ,onstitutional ri63ts and 3is eA3ortation to t3e 5urors to ,onsider parties on +a level pla-in6

/ield"2 4ere inno,ent and appropriate" 43en vie4ed in ,onteAt" and 3is statements made in ,onne,tion 4it3 ,ondemnees@ motion /or liti6ation eApenses under statute providin6 /or su,3 a4ard based on unreasonableness o/ ,ondemner@s pretrial o//er 4ere appropriate in ,onteAt o/ rulin6 on ,ontested motion. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. MM 110. 1)a*)%*" 1'0.3" 1250.410)b*. ;10< J$d!es 221 4,%2)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k49 Dias and =re5udi,e 22'k49)2* k. $tatements and Apressions o/ Hpinion b- >ud6e. Most Cited Cases 9rial 5ud6e@s eApressions o/ state o/ mind arisin6 in ,onteAt o/ 5udi,ial 3earin6 do not sub5e,t 5ud6e to dis0uali/i,ation based on bias" even 43en 5ud6e appears to be adverse to one o/ t3e parties" 43en opinion is based upon a,tual observan,e o/ 4itnesses and eviden,e 6iven durin6 t3e trial o/ an a,tion" sin,e it is 5ud6e@s dutto ,onsider and pass upon t3e eviden,e produ,ed be/ore 3im" and 43en t3e eviden,e is in ,on/li,t" to resolve t3at ,on/li,t in /avor o/ t3e part- 43ose eviden,e out4ei63s t3at o/ t3e opposin6 part-. West@s :nn.Cal.C.C.=. MM 110. 1)a*)%*" 1'0.3. #he Colo!6osG Accusations o' Judicial ?ias Are (nsupported. ;(< We /irst note o4ners never raised t3e purported issue o/ 5udi,ial bias in t3e trial ,ourt. Dias and pre5udi,e are 6rounds /or dis0uali/i,ation o/ trial 5ud6es. )M 110. 1" subd. )a*)%*.* :nd i/ 5ud6es /ail to re,use t3emselves" t3ere is a statutor- pro,edure to liti6ate t3e issue. )M 1'0.3.*H4ners did not take advanta6e o/ t3ese pro,edures and" based on t3e re,ord presented 3ere" 4ould 3ave /ailed i/ t3e3ad. LLMoreover" o4ners did not preserve t3eir ,laim o/ 5udi,ial bias /or revie4 be,ause t3e- did not ob5e,t to t3e alle6ed improprieties and never asked t3e 5ud6e to ,orre,t remarks made or re,use 3imsel/. //226 )People v. )eaton )2001* 2% Cal.4t3 59(" %9(" 110 Cal.Jptr.2d 441" 2( =.3d 1'57 People v. *ines )199'* 15 Cal.4t3 99'" 1040&1041" %4 Cal.Jptr.2d 594" 93( =.2d 3((.* Dut" most importantl-" t3e 5ud6e@s statements on 43i,3 o4ners base t3eir ,laim o/ bias are inno,ent and appropriate 43en vie4ed in ,onteAt. ;9< H4ners /irst ,omplain t3at at t3e outset o/ t3e trial" t3e 5ud6e 6ave t3e potential 5urors a 3istori,al overvie4 o/ t3e adoption o/ t3e #nited $tates Constitution. 93e ,ourt emp3asiIed t3e importan,e o/ ,onstitutional ri63ts and t3e sa,ri/i,es made b- man- to prote,t t3em. ?t t3en noted t3at t3e sa,ri/i,es asked o/ 5urors" in 6ivin6 o/ t3eir time" 4ere also ne,essar- to preserve our ,onstitutional ri63ts and our s-stem o/ 5usti,e. H4ners no4 interpret t3is admirable eAposition as an atta,k upon t3eir status as immi6rants /rom ?tal-. ?t 4ould be sad indeed i/ statements in support o/ our /121, Constitution" statements in support o/ our s-stem o/ 5usti,e" and statements in support o/ 5ur- trials 4ere pro3ibited as atta,ks upon t3ose o/ us 43o 4ere not born in t3is ,ountr-. 93is a,,usation a6ainst a ,ons,ientious" ,apable 5ud6e" even i/ it 4ere standin6 alone" t3ro4s doubt upon o4ners@ ,redibilit- and t3e 5ud6ment o/ t3eir la4-er. 93e ,ourt illustrated t3e need /or impartialit- b- notin6 t3at t3e 5urors@ +mindset2 s3ould start 4it3 bot3 parties on +a level pla-in6 /ield.2 9o illustrate t3e inappropriateness o/ 5urors ,omin6 to t3eir task 4it3 predetermined stereot-pes" t3e ,ourt ,autioned t3em not to base t3eir de,ision on pre,on,eived ideas su,3 as a bias a6ainst distri,t be,ause it 4as a publi, entit- or a6ainst o4ners be,ause t3e- 3ave ?talian surnames. 93e point made to t3e 5urors 4as important" and t3e illustrations 4ere appropriate to t3e ,ase. Dut o4ners t4ist t3e 5ud6e@s ,ons,ientious attempt to sensitiIe t3e 5urors to t3eir dut- to avoid bias as itsel/ demonstratin6 bias. Were 4e

to a,,ept o4ners@ tortured lo6i," 4e s3ould ,ensure ever- 5ud6e 43o ,autions 5urors not to be biased a6ainst a liti6ant 43o is t3e member o/ a parti,ular et3ni, 6roup. H4ners 6o on 4it3 a number o/ similar atta,ks on inno,ent and appropriate statements made b- t3e 5ud6e. We 4ill not respond spe,i/i,all- to ea,3 o/ t3ese additional un/ounded ,laims7 t3e /ore6oin6 eAamples are su//i,ient to demonstrate o4ners@ a,,usations la,k merit. LLH4ners also 4ant us to ,on,lude t3e 5ud6e 4as biased be,ause 3e ruled a6ainst t3em on some o/ t3eir evidentiar- ob5e,tions. Dut" 4it3out even notin6 t3e 0uestions to 43i,3 t3e- ob5e,ted" t3e- merel- re/er us to pa6es in t3e trans,ript 43i,3 supposedldemonstrate some o/ t3eir ob5e,tions 4ere overruled. LL93eir brie/ /ails to tell us 43at t3e ob5e,tions 4ere or 43- t3ese unidenti/ied ob5e,tions s3ould 3ave been sustained. :s 4e noted earlier" absent reasoned ar6ument t3e issues are 4aived. )?adie v. ?ank o' A!erica% supra% %' Cal.:pp.4t3 at pp. '(4&'(5" '9 Cal.Jptr.2d 2'37 ?ernard v. *art'ord ire Ins. Co.% supra% 22% Cal.:pp.3d at p. 1205" 2'' Cal.Jptr. 401.* 93e /inal ,laims o/ bias relate to t3e 5ud6e@s statements" noted earlier" made in ,onne,tion 4it3 t3e motion /or liti6ation eApenses. W3en makin6 a rulin6" a 5ud6e interprets t3e eviden,e" 4ei63s ,redibilit-" and makes /indin6s. ?n doin6 so" t3e 5ud6e ne,essaril- makes and eApresses determinations in /avor o/ and a6ainst parties. Ho4 ,ould it be ot3er4iseO We 4ill not 3old t3at ever- statement a 5ud6e makes to eAplain 3is or 3er reasons /or rulin6 a6ainst a part- ,onstitutes eviden,e o/ 5udi,ial bias. ;10< +;W<3en t3e state o/ mind o/ t3e trial 5ud6e appears to be adverse to one o/ t3e parties but is based upon a,tual observan,e o/ t3e 4itnesses and t3e eviden,e //221 6iven durin6 t3e trial o/ an a,tion" it does not amount to t3at pre5udi,e a6ainst a liti6ant 43i,3 dis0uali/ies 3im in t3e trial o/ t3e a,tion. ?t /1220 is 3is dut- to ,onsider and pass upon t3e eviden,e produ,ed be/ore 3im" and 43en t3e eviden,e is in ,on/li,t" to resolve t3at ,on/li,t in /avor o/ t3e part- 43ose eviden,e out4ei63s t3at o/ t3e opposin6 part-. 93e opinion t3us /ormed" bein6 t3e result o/ a 5udi,ial 3earin6" does not amount to ;improper< bias and pre5udi,e ....2 )>reling v. )uperior Court )1944* 25 Cal.2d 305" 312" 153 =.2d '34.* &la5e6ore v. S$.erior Co$rt, 12, Cal.(...4th 36, 21 Cal.:.tr.3d 811, 02 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 3883, 2002 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 2223 %Cal.(... 2 -ist. Ma3 06, 2002)

Bot ver- eAplanator-.

Car,ia ,ontends t3at t3e ,ourt@s erroneous rulin6s /avorin6 onl- :von +re/le,t an animus to plainti//s@ pleadin6s t3at is in,onsistent 4it3 5udi,ial ob5e,tivit-2 and +3ave ,ompromised .t3e appearan,e o/ impartialit-"1 2 ,itin6 Bose v. )uperior Court )2000* (1 Cal.:pp.4t3 5%4" 5'%" 9% Cal.Jptr.2d (43 )Bose *" and Catchpole v. ?rannon )1995* 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 23'" 24'" 42 Cal.Jptr.2d 440)Catchpole *. We disa6ree. ;24< We re5e,t t3e notion t3at erroneous rulin6s" 4it3out more" ma- 5usti/- t3e removal o/ a trial 5ud6e /rom /urt3er pro,eedin6s in a ,ase. W3ile /60 4e ,on,lude t3e ,ourt erred in several respe,ts" t3e leap /rom erroneous rulin6s to t3e appearan,e o/ bias is one 4e de,line to make. 93is is not a ,ase like Bose or Catchpole. ?n Bose% t3e ,ourt ,on,luded t3at +t3e appearan,e o/ impartialit- ma- 3ave been ,ompromised2 LL43ere t3e trial 5ud6e disre6arded an appellate order to ,ondu,t a 3earin6 on a 3abeas ,orpus petition" denied t3e petition 4it3out a statement o/ reasons" and /iled its o4n return to t3e appellate ,ourt@s subse0uent order to s3o4 ,ause" t3ereb- assumin6 t3e appearan,e o/ an adversar- rat3er t3an a neutral. )Bose% supra% (1 Cal.:pp.4t3 at pp. 5%9" 5'5&5'%" 9% Cal.Jptr.2d (43.* ?n Catchpole% t3e re,ord 4as ri/e 4it3 eviden,e o/ t3e trial ,ourt@s 6ender bias durin6 a seAual

3arassment ,ase" dra4in6 t3e appellate ,ourt +inelu,tabl-2 to t3e ,on,lusion t3at t3e trial 5ud6e@s ,ondu,t did not a,,ord 4it3 re,o6niIed prin,iples o/ 5udi,ial de,orum and t3at +;t<3e avera6e person on t3e street mi63t t3ere/ore 5usti/iabl- doubt 43et3er t3e trial in t3is ,ase 4as impartial.2//8,1)Catchpole% supra% 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 2%2" 42 Cal.Jptr.2d 440.* ?n t3is ,ase" t3e trial ,ourt did not3in6 more t3an make t3ree erroneous rulin6s. LLCar,ia ,an point to not3in6 in t3e trans,ript o/ t3e 3earin6s or else43ere re/le,tin6 ,omments or ,ondu,t b- t3e trial 5ud6e t3at su66ests an- bias in /avor o/ :von or a6ainst t3e Dlakemore plainti//s. +93e Courts o/ :ppeal 3ave 3eld t3at t3e po4er to dis0uali/- a 5ud6e under Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0.1" subdivision ),*" s3ould . +be used sparin6l- and onl43ere t3e interests o/ 5usti,e re0uire it.2 1 2 )Livingston v. Marie Callenders% Inc. )1999* '2 Cal.:pp.4t3 (30" (40" (5 Cal.Jptr.2d 52(.* We see no basis /or ,on,ludin6 t3at t3is is su,3 a ,ase.

;ar6ue bp %0%( it is t3e dut- o/ an attorne- to do all o/ t3e /ollo4in6F )d* 9o emplo-" /or t3e purpose o/ maintainin6 t3e ,auses ,on/ided to 3im or 3er t3ose means onl- as are ,onsistent 4it3 trut3" and never to seek to mislead t3e 5ud6e or an- 5udi,ial o//i,er b- an arti/i,e or /alse statement o/ /a,t or la4.<M
In re 9$ardianshi. o0 L.>., 136 Cal.(...4th 481, 38 Cal.:.tr.3d 8,4, 06 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 1133, 2006 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 1236 %Cal.(... 3 -ist., 7e* 01, 2006)

9ermination 3earin6" e0uivalent to a trial.

/484 i63teen mont3s a/ter t3e trial ,ourt appointed 6uardians /or L.8. )t3e minor*" 3er parents petitioned to terminate t3e //8,6 6uardians3ip. :mon6 ot3er t3in6s" t3easserted t3e- 4ere no4 able to ade0uatel- ,are /or t3e minor and" t3us" t3e- 4ere entitled to re6ain ,ustod- o/ t3eir ,3ild. 93e ,ourt denied t3e petition" /indin6 t3at alt3ou63 t3e parents R,an" at t3is time" provide /ood" s3elter and ,lot3in6 /or t3e ,3ild"R it 4ould be detrimental to t3e minor to terminate t3e 6uardians3ip. 93e parents appeal. 93eir primar- ,ontention is t3at be,ause t3e- 4ere /it parents 43o ,ould provide ade0uate /ood" ,lot3in6" and s3elter /or t3e minor" it 4as t3eir ,onstitutional ri63t to 3ave t3e 6uardians3ip terminated and t3e minor returned to t3eir ,ustod-. We disa6ree. For ,larit- and to preserve t3e minor@s priva,-" 4e 4ill re/er to t3e minor@s parents as mot3er and /at3er" or ,olle,tivel- as t3e parents. 93e minor@s 6uardians are 3er maternal un,le and 3is 4i/e. We 4ill re/er to t3em as un,le and aunt" or ,olle,tivelas t3e 6uardians. ?n 1999" 43en t3e minor 4as eleven -ears old" 3er /amil- 4as eAperien,in6 di//i,ulties. Fat3er 3ad an al,o3ol problem and multiple ,onvi,tions /or drivin6 under t3e in/luen,e o/ al,o3ol" and 3is driver@s li,ense 3ad been revoked. Mot3er 4as unemplo-ed. Fat3er 4as 4orkin6 but not Rt3at mu,3.R 93e parents separated" /at3er moved to anot3er ,it-" and mot3er ,ommen,ed pro,eedin6s to dissolve t3e marria6e. Mot3er t3en be6an to eAperien,e 3ealt3 /482 problems" in,ludin6 a beni6n lun6 tumor and 3eart problems" and s3e 4as 3ospitaliIed on at least t4o o,,asions. ?n :pril 2000" mot3er pla,ed t3e minor in t3e ,are o/ t3e un,le and aunt. D- >une 2001" t3e parents 3ad re,on,iled and 4ere livin6 to6et3er a lon6 distan,e a4a- /rom t3e minor. 93e un,le and aunt t3en /iled a petition seekin6 appointment as t3e minor@s 6uardians. ?t appears t3e petition 4as pre,ipitated b- t3e minor@s eApressed 4is3 to remain in t3e ,ustod- o/ 3er un,le and aunt7 b- 3er /ear t3at i/ s3e

visited 3er parents" t3e- 4ould not allo4 3er to return to t3e un,le@s and aunt@s ,are7 and b- an an6r- telep3one ,on/rontation bet4een t3e minor and 3er parents. :/ter a ,ourt investi6ator re,ommended t3at t3e petition be 6ranted" t3e parents a6reed to a s,3edule o/ visitation7 and 4it3 t3at stipulation" t3e- did not oppose t3e petition. ?n :u6ust 2001" t3e petition 4as 6ranted" makin6 t3e un,le and aunt t3e minor@s 6uardians. ?n 2002" /ollo4in6 an annual revie4" t3e 6uardians3ip 4as ,ontinued in e//e,t. $3ortl- be/ore t3e s,3eduled annual revie4 in 2003" t3e parents /iled a petition to terminate t3e 6uardians3ip. 93e parents and t3e 6uardians t3en rea,3ed an a6reement //8,1 /or t3e minor to spend ever- ot3er 4eek in t3e summer 4it3 t3e parents and" i/ ever-t3in6 4ent 4ell" /or t3e minor to be returned to parental ,ustod- in t3e /all. 93e trial ,ourt postponed" until a/ter t3e summer" a 3earin6 on 43et3er to terminate t3e 6uardians3ip. :ll did not 6o 4ell. 93e visitation s,3edule /ailed" and t3e minor made it kno4n t3at s3e 4as stron6l- opposed to bein6 returned to 3er parents@ ,ustod-. 93e 6uardians t3us de,ided to oppose termination o/ t3e 6uardians3ip" and t3e- su,,ess/ull- asked t3e ,ourt to appoint ,ounsel /or t3e minor to represent 3er interests. :t t3e 3earin6 on t3e petition" t3e parents presented eviden,e t3at t3e- 3ad improved t3e ,onditions 43i,3 3ad resulted in t3e 6uardians3ip. Fat3er 4as emplo-ed and no lon6er 4as abusin6 al,o3ol and dru6s7 mot3er@s 3ealt3 issues 4ere under ,ontrol7 t3e- 3ad rented an apartment7 and t3ere no lon6er 4as disruption" an6er" 3ostilit- or problems bet4een t3em. 93e parents also asserted t3at 43ile t3e minor 3ad been in t3e 6uardians@ ,ustod-" s3e 4as not 6ettin6 t3e kind o/ edu,ation s3e needed. ?t 4as stipulated t3e minor 4ould testi/- t3at 43en s3e visited 3er parents" t3eprovided 3er 4it3 Rade0uateR /ood" ,lot3in6" and s3elter" and R6uidan,eR in t3e sense Rt3e parents dire,ted ;3er< 43at to do and not to do"R but t3at t3e ,onditions R,ould 3ave been better.R /486 93e 6uardians presented t3e /ollo4in6 eviden,e at t3e 3earin6. Mot3er 3as a severe an6er ,ontrol problem7 s3e 4ill s,ream" -ell" 3it" and t3ro4 t3in6s" o/ten on an unpredi,table basis. Fat3er ,ontinues to drink to eA,ess" and 3e and mot3er o/ten en6a6e in loud and len6t3- s,reamin6 mat,3es. :lt3ou63 t3ere 4as no eviden,e /at3er 3ad been p3-si,all- violent to t3e minor" 3e 4as p3-si,all- violent to 3er t4o older 3al/ brot3ers" bot3 o/ 43om eventuall- 4ere removed /rom t3e 3ome. F 93e parents also atta,k t3e trial ,ourt" ,laimin6 t3e- 6ot R3ome&to4nedR b- a biased 5ud6e 43o 6ave Rinappropriate le6al de/eren,e to lo,al parties" 4itnesses" la4-ers and eAperts.R :,,ordin6 to t3e parents" bias is demonstrated in 43at t3e- ,3ara,teriIe as t3e 5ud6e@s Rinsultin6 ,ommentsR a6ainst t3em in t3e statement o/ de,ision 43ere t3e 5ud6e saidF R?t appears t3at t3e parents are pla,in6 t3eir desires above t3e best interest o/ t3eir ,3ild. :n- ne4 ,ir,umstan,es 43i,3 mi63t point to 5usti/i,ation to terminate a 6uardians3ip must be su//i,ient enou63 to over,ome t3e in3erent disruption o/ tearin6 a ,3ild a4a- /rom a 6uardian 43o 3as been and is doin6 a 6ood 5ob o/ ,arin6 /or and nurturin6 t3e ,3ild. 9o terminate t3is 6uardians3ip at t3is time based on t3e /a,ts presented 4ould be detrimental in ever- sense o/ t3e 4ord to Lisa. ?t is un/ortunate t3e parents /ail to re,o6niIe t3is /a,t.R ;FB2< FB2. 93e parents@ ,ounsel ineA,usabl- mis0uotes t3e 5ud6e as sa-in6 it is Ra s3ameR t3e parents /ail to re,o6niIe t3at termination o/ t3e 6uardians3ip 4ould be detrimental to t3e minor.

/200 93is ,laim o/ 5udi,ial bias is utterl- re,kless. ?t 4as t3e trial 5ud6e@s dutto ,onsider and pass upon t3e eviden,e presented to 3im. :n opinion /ormed b- a 5ud6e as t3e result o/ a 5udi,ial 3earin6" even t3ou63 it is adverse to a part-" does not amount to bias. )People v. Yeager %1,61) 22 Cal.2d 314, 3,1, 10 Cal.:.tr. 82,, 32, +.2d 261" overruled on anot3er 6round in People v. Chi >o Wong )19'%* 1( Cal.3d %9(" '1%" /n. 14" 135 Cal.Jptr. 392" 55' =.2d 9'%7 //,08>reling v. )uperior Court )1944* 25 Cal.2d 305" 311&312" 153 =.2d '34.* 93e 5ud6e@s observation 4as an appropriate ,omment on t3e eviden,e t3at 3e /ound to be ,redible.

LL @aC$* v. Salinas >alle3 Me6orial #ealthcare S3ste6, %2004) 122 Cal.(...4th 414, 486 ;18 Cal.:.tr.3d 180< 2 :nd ,anon 2 o/ t3e Cali/ornia Code o/ J$dicial Ethics states t3at a 5ud6e +s3all avoid impropriet- and t3e appearance o/ impropriet- in all o/ t3e 5ud6e@s a,tivities.2 )?tali,s added.* LL93e ,ommentar- to t3is ,anon provides an ob5e,tive test /or t3e appearan,e o/ impropriet-F 93e 0uestion is not 43et3er t3e 5ud6e is a,tuall- biased" but +43et3er a person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts mi63t reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to a,t 4it3 inte6rit-" impartialit-" and ,ompeten,e.2 )$ee" e.6." *all v. *arker )1999* %9 Cal.:pp.4t3 (3%" (41" (2 Cal.Jptr.2d 44" disapproved on anot3er 6round in Casa *errera% Inc. v. ?eydoun )2004* 32 Cal.4t3 33%" 9 Cal.Jptr.3d 9'" (3 =.3d 49'.* LLMeasured b- t3ese standards and underl-in6 prin,iples" $8MH$1s pro,edures /or appointin6 3earin6 o//i,ers 4ere not ,onsistent 4it3 t3e appearan,e o/ impartialit-. :ppellant@s ob5e,tion on t3is 6round 4as sound" and 3is petition /or a 4rit o/ mandate s3ould t3ere/ore 3ave been 6ranted.
#all v. #ar5er, 6, Cal.(...4th 836, 82 Cal.:.tr.2d 44, ,, Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 884, ,, -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. 1081 %Cal.(... 4 -ist., Jan 2,, 1,,,) $#MM:JK :n investment /und ,ompan- and its ,3ie/ eAe,utive o//i,er )C H* brou63t a mali,ious prose,ution a,tion a6ainst t3e attorne- o/ a /ormer emplo-ee o/ t3e ,ompan-" based on t3e emplo-ee@s ,ross&a,tion in plainti//s@ underl-in6 de/amation suit. 93e ,ross& a,tion" pursued b- t3e emplo-ee a6ainst plainti//s" arose /rom plainti//s@ alle6ed brea,3 o/ an oral promise to provide t3e emplo-ee 4it3 a parti,ular bonus. 93e trial ,ourt 6ranted summar- 5ud6ment in /avor o/ plainti//s" t3e ,ross&de/endants in t3e ,ross&a,tion" based on t3e statute o/ /rauds and t3e parol eviden,e rule. ?n t3e mali,ious prose,ution a,tion" t3e ,ourt" 43i,3 eApressed ne6ative opinions about attorne-s t3rou63out t3e trial" entered 5ud6ment /or plainti//s. )$uperior Court o/ Hran6e Count-" Bo. '35(94" Ja6nar n6ebretsen" >ud6e. FBY * 93e Court o/ :ppeal reversed. 93e ,ourt 3eld t3at t3e trial ,ourt@s eApressions o/ ne6ative opinions about attorne-s t3rou63out t3e trial denied de/endant a /air and impartial trial in violation o/ 3is ri63t to due pro,ess. 93e ,omments made b- t3e trial 5ud6e re/le,ted 3is biased opinions t3at attorne-s routinel- abuse t3eir position o/ po4er" t3at t3e- use t3e 5udi,ial pro,ess as a means o/ ,oer,ion" spend unne,essar- time on ,ases to in/late t3eir /ees" and use tri,ks to distort t3e trut3. Judicial ?ias )1a* 93rou63out t3e trial" t3e ,ourt eApressed ne6ative opinions about attorne-s. Harker ,laims t3is obvious bias re0uires reversal be,ause it ,reated t3e appearan,e o/

impropriet- and denied 3im a /air and impartial trial in violation o/ 3is ri63t to due pro,ess. :/ter a ,ompre3ensive revie4 o/ t3e re,ord" 4e a6ree. )2* +W3atever disa6reement t3ere ma- be in our 5urispruden,e as to t3e s,ope o/ t3e p3rase @due pro,ess o/ la4"@ t3ere is no dispute t3at it minimall- ,ontemplates t3e opportunit- to be /ull- and /airl- 3eard be/ore an impartial de,isionmaker.2 ) Catchpole v. ?rannon )1995* 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 23'" 245 ; 42 Cal.Jptr.2d 440<.* : 5ud6e@s impartialit- is evaluated b- an ob5e,tive" rat3er t3an sub5e,tive" standard. 93at is" + @ 2due to t3e sensitivit- o/ t3e 0uestion and in3erent di//i,ulties o/ proo/ as 4ell as t3e importan,e o/ publi, ,on/iden,e in t3e 5udi,ial s-stem" t3e issue is not limited to t3e eAisten,e o/ an a,tual bias.+ @ 2 )Id. at p. 24%.*93e 0uestion be,omes 43et3er + @ 2a reasonable man ;or 4oman< 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-.+ @ 2 )I6id.7 see also In re Marriage o' Iverson )1992* 11 Cal.:pp.4t3 1495 ; 15 Cal.Jptr.2d '0<7 Cal. Code >ud. Condu,t" ,anon 2 ;23 West@s Cal. Codes :nn. Jules" pt. 2 )199% ed.* p. '09<7 Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1" subd. ),*.* W3en t3e alle6ations o/ bias relate to /a,tual issues" t3e- are parti,ularl- troublin6 be,ause t3e appellate ,ourt usuall- de/ers to t3e trial ,ourt@s /a,tual and ,redibilit/indin6s. )Catchpole v. ?rannon" supra" 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 24'.*?mpli,it in t3is time&3onored standard o/ revie4 is t3e assumption t3at su,3 /indin6s 4ere made /airland impartiall-. )1b* 93e ,omments made b- t3e trial 5ud6e 3ere re/le,ted 3is opinion t3at attorne-s o,,up- a position o/ po4er over t3e ordinar- ,itiIen 43i,3 t3e- routinel- abuse. For eAampleF +;9<3at@s 43at ? like 43en an attorne- is on t3e stand bein6 6rilled and kno4;s< 43at it@s like to be sued and be 6rilled.2 +?@d love to see attorne-s put on t3e stand. ? t3ink it is poeti, 5usti,e. :nd ? reall- 3ope t3at somebod- t3at is 5ust a ti6er at eAamination or /842 ,ross&eAamination 6ets t3em and 5ust 4orks t3em over. Cenerall- speakin6 t3e- ,ome out o/ t3e eAperien,e" i/ it@s been properl- done" 3umbled. :nd mu,3 more appre,iative o/ 43at t3e-@ve put ot3er people t3rou63.2 +;H<ne o/ t3e t3in6s ? t3ink is an appropriate learnin6 tool /or attorne-s is /or t3em to be on t3e 4itness stand /or some time and to be 6rilled unmer,i/ull- so t3e- ,an learn 3o4 it /eels and possibl- be a bit more s-mpat3eti, on 43om t3e- in/li,t t3eir terror ....2 93e ,ourt indi,ated its belie/ t3at attorne-s are predisposed to use t3e 5udi,ial pro,ess as a means o/ ,oer,ion. +93ere@s a 6reat deal o/ ,ommentar- bot3 in t3e le6al pro/ession and in t3e nonle6al pro/ession ;about< t3e ,ud6el t3at attorne-s use a6ainst ,itiIens" beatin6 t3em do4n" killin6 t3e /orest b- t3e papers t3e- produ,e in t3e ,ourse o/ t3e trial. 9en billion dollars in t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia is used battorne-s in t3eir suits" and it produ,es not3in6 eA,ept mone- /or attorne-s.2 93e neAt da-" 3e repeated" +;:<ttorne-s 3ave an unusual ,ud6el t3e- ,an use a6ainst ,itiIens b- virtue o/ t3eir abilit- to ,ontrol t3e eviden,e. ;V< Kou kno4 -ou 3ave t3e 4eapons. 93e ,itiIen does not&4eapons" not eviden,e&and 3e needs or s3e needs to be able to /eel se,ure /rom its arbitrar-" inappropriate use. :nd ? t3ink t3at@s 43at mali,ious prose,ution is all about.2 93e ,ourt apparentl- believes attorne-s spend unne,essar- time on ,ases to in/late t3eir /ees. +? am al4a-s distressed 43en t3ere is a 6reat deal o/ le6al t3res3in6 around" 43i,3 simpl- runs up t3e le6al ,osts" and it bot3ers me be,ause" normallspeakin6" -our la4 is /airl- ,lear" 5ust t3at t3e attorne-s i6nore it and tr- to do somet3in6 43i,3 t3e la4 does not allo4.2 +:ttorne-s@ 0uestions are kind o/ like eApenditures in a /amil-. 93e- al4a-s rise to take up t3e available time or available ,as3.2 93e ,ourt ,3ara,teriIed Harker@s deposition o/ Hall as +simpl- a deposition askin6 ever- ,on,eivable 0uestion t3at t3e attorne- ,an t3ink o/ be,ause 3e is paid bt3e 3our.2 LL93e ,ourt insinuated t3at attorne-s use tri,ks to distort t3e trut3F +? am not t3e

kind o/ 4eak 4illed individual t3at ,an be sedu,ed b- a silver ton6ued la4-er.2 +=ullin6 t3in6s out o/ 3ats is 43at attorne-s do /or a livin6.2 :nd at times t3e ,ourt resorted to outri63t ridi,ule o/ t3e pro/essionF +;:<ttorne-s are some43at like /iredo6s. Kou kno4" t3e /ire bell rin6s and t3e- 5ump around and bark" and sometimes even in eA,itement urinate all over and be3ave in an inappropriate /as3ion" but t3at@s onl- be,ause o/ t3e eA,itement o/ t3e moment" not be,ause o/ an- ne,essarintent on t3eir part.2 Contrar- to respondents@ assertions" t3ese and ot3er similar statements b- t3e trial 5ud6e ,annot be ,3ara,teriIed as +5ovial be3avior2 or +verbal repartee.2 93ese statements stron6l- su66est t3e 5ud6e 3eld pre,on,eived /843 ideas about t3e pro,livit- o/ attorne-s to initiate and ,3urn liti6ation /or /inan,ial 6ain" re6ardless o/ t3e merit o/ t3e ,laims or t3e dama6e it mi63t do to t3e de/endant. W3et3er Harker initiated 9a-lor@s ,ross&,omplaint 4it3out probable ,ause and /or an improper purpose 4as t3e ,entral issue in t3e mali,ious prose,ution ,ase a6ainst 3im. Harker" o/ ,ourse" maintained 3e believed 3is ,lient@s version o/ t3e /a,ts and presented eviden,e to support t3e reasonableness o/ t3at belie/. 93e trial 5ud6e" 3o4ever" made ,redibilit- /indin6s t3at re5e,ted Harker@s stor- and t3at o/ 3is supportin6 4itnesses. ?t is di//i,ult to ima6ine a more dire,t ,onne,tion bet4een t3e 5ud6e@s eApressed bias and t3e 6ravamen o/ t3e ,ase be/ore 3im. Hall and 9ro- ,orre,tl- point out t3at Catchpole and Iverson" ,ases in 43i,3 5udi,ial bias resulted in reversal" dealt 4it3 6ender bias. 93e- ,laim attorne-s are not entitled to t3e same prote,tion /rom dis,rimination t3at 4omen 3ave been a,,orded. LLDut Catchpole and Iverson and t3e ,ases on 43i,3 t3e- rel- ,learl- /o,us on t3e appearan,e o/ un/airness 43en a 5ud6e reveals pre,on,eived ideas based on stereot-pes. +We are mind/ul o/ t3e demands on overburdened trial 5ud6es and t3e /rustration t3e- sometimes /eel 43en impeded in t3e dis,3ar6e o/ t3eir 3eavresponsibilities. #nderstandable eApressions o/ su,3 /rustration rarel- 4arrant appellate attention. We must also keep in mind" 3o4ever" t3at t3e sour,e o/ 5udi,ial aut3orit- lies ultimatel- in t3e /ait3 o/ t3e people t3at a /air 3earin6 ma- be 3ad. >udi,ial be3avior inimi,al to t3at ne,essar- per,eption ,an never be ,ountenan,ed and ma- 4ell provide a basis /or reversal even i/ not t3e produ,t o/ 6ender bias. ?n t3is ,ase" t3e trial 5ud6e@s re/eren,e to plainti//s ;sic< ,ause as @nonsense"@ ,ombined 4it3 3is ot3er ,omments /rom t3e ben,3" s3o4 pre5ud6ment t3at is una,,eptable 0uite apart /rom ,onsideration o/ 6ender.2 )Catchpole v. ?rannon" supra" 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 253.* Havin6 /ound t3e appearan,e o/ 5udi,ial bias" 4e 4ould reverse t3e 5ud6ment and remand t3e matter to a di//erent 5ud6e /or a ne4 trial on all issues )Catchpole v. ?rannon" supra" 3% Cal.:pp.4t3 at p. 24'*" but /or anot3er error t3at re0uires reversal and terminates t3e ,aseF 93e underl-in6 ,ase did not result in a termination on t3e merits /avorable to Hall and 9ro-. In re a!ner, 121 Cal.(...4th 138, 22 Cal.:.tr.3d 201, 02 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 168,, 2002

:ppellate Court o/ t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia utiliIed t3e Code o/ >udi,ial t3i,s in determinin6 t3e appearan,e o/ partialit- under C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%*
United 7ar6 or5ers o0 (6erica v. S$.erior Co$rt, 110 Cal.(...3d ,1, 216 Cal.:.tr. 4 %Cal.(... 4 -ist. J$l 16, 1,82)

Case 3as bad out,ome but applies" C.C.=. 1'0.1)a*)%*. Cites Federal Case on 15 #.$.C. 455" ?n Je #nited $tates /indin6 appearan,e o/ bias /rom 5udi,ial sour,e. ?n re #nited $tates )19(1* %%% F.2d %90 )1st Cir." !e, 0'" 19(1*

$#MM:JK : /arm 4orkers union petitioned t3e Court o/ :ppeal /or a 4rit o/ mandate seekin6 to dis0uali/- t3e trial 5ud6e /or bias )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1* in a ,ourt trial o/ an a,tion b- a 6ro4er a6ainst t3e union /or dama6es due to union a,tivit- in ,onne,tion 4it3 a strike. 93e union@s mid&trial motion to dis0uali/- t3e trial 5ud6e o,,urred a/ter t3e 5ud6e mentioned to t3e union@s ,ounsel" alle6edl- in/ormall-" t3at 3e 5ust remembered t3at several -ears a6o 3is 4i/e 3ad volunteered /or and 4orked t4o to t3ree da-s as a repla,ement 4orker in a ,arrot s3ed o4ned b- t3e 6ro4er. LL93e union@s motion alle6ed t3at t3e 5ud6e@s /ailure to dis,lose t3is /a,t mi63t ,ause a person to reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to be impartial in t3e ,ase. )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1" subd. )a*)%*)C*.* :/ter t3e trial 5ud6e denied t3e motion" it 4as re/erred to anot3er 5ud6e b- a6reement o/ t3e parties. 93e trial 5ud6e@s responsive de,laration and ans4er eAplained t3at 3e 3ad /or6otten about 3is 4i/e@s 4ork /or t3e 6ro4er until some testimon- at trial re6ardin6 repla,ement 4orkers re/res3ed 3is re,olle,tion. 93e lo4er ,ourt" in rulin6 a6ainst t3e union" stated t3at t3ere 4as no reason 43- a person 4ould reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to be impartial be,ause several -ears previousl- t3e 5ud6e@s 4i/e 4orked /or t3e 6ro4er /or a period o/ t4o da-s. 93e Court o/ :ppeal denied t3e 4rit. LL93e ,ourt noted t3at t3e standard /or dis0uali/i,ation provided /or in M 1'0.1" subd. )a*)%*)C*" is /undamentall- an ob5e,tive one. 93us" t3e issue is not limited to t3e eAisten,e o/ an a,tual bias. Jat3er" i/ a reasonable person 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s partialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated. Ho4ever" a 5ud6e /a,ed 4it3 potential 6round /or dis0uali/i,ation ou63t to ,onsider 3o4 3is parti,ipation in a 6iven ,ase looks to t3e avera6e person on t3e street" rat3er t3an t3e 5ud6e@s personal vie4 or t3e liti6ants@ ne,essaril- partisan vie4s. 93e ,ourt also noted t3e 5ud6e@s possible partialit- must be ,onsidered as o/ t3e time t3e motion is brou63t. 93us" in den-in6 t3e 4rit" t3e ,ourt noted t3e ,ir,umstan,es did not involve t3e 5ud6e dire,tl-" and t3ere 4as no ,urrent personal or /inan,ial interest 43i,3 4ould dis0uali/- t3e 5ud6e. Finall-" t3e union /ailed to ,ite a sin6le instan,e o/ ,ondu,t durin6 t3e trial 43i,3 4ould support an in/eren,e o/ partialit-. )Hpinion b- Wiener" :,tin6 =. >." 4it3 Dutler and Le4is" >>." ,on,urrin6.* H :!BH9 $ Classi/ied to Cali/ornia !i6est o/ H//i,ial Jeports %1) >ud6es M 14&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias or =re5udi,e&&Hb5e,tive $tandard&& =ubli, Con/iden,e in >udi,ial $-stem. LL93e standard /or dis0uali/i,ation provided in Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1" subd. )a* )%*)C*" providin6 /or dis0uali/i,ation /or bias or pre5udi,e 43ere a person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts mi63t reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e is able to be impartial" is /undamentall- an ob5e,tive one. ?t represents a le6islative 5ud6ment t3at" due to t3e sensitivit- o/ t3e 0uestion and in3erent di//i,ulties o/ proo/" as 4ell as t3e importan,e o/ publi, ,on/iden,e in t3e 5udi,ial s-stem" t3e issue is not limited to t3e eAisten,e o/ an a,tual bias. Jat3er" i/ a reasonable person 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated. 9o insure t3at pro,eedin6s appear to t3e publi, to be impartial and 3en,e 4ort3- o/ t3eir ,on/iden,e" t3e situation must be vie4ed t3rou63 t3e e-es o/ t3e ob5e,tive person. 93is standard indi,ates t3at t3e de,ision is not based on t3e 5ud6e@s personal vie4 o/ 3is o4n impartialit-" and also su66ests t3at t3e liti6ants@ ne,essaril- partisan vie4s do not provide t3e appli,able /rame o/ re/eren,e. Jat3er" t3e 5ud6e ou63t to ,onsider 3o4 3is parti,ipation in a 6iven ,ase looks to t3e avera6e person on t3e street.

;$ee Cal.J$r.3d, >ud6es" M 31 et se0.7 (6.J$r.2d, >ud6es" M 1%% et se0.< %2) >ud6es M 14&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias or =re5udi,e&&=artialit- at 9ime Motion Drou63t. 93e /a,ts and ,ir,umstan,es bearin6 on a 5ud6e@s possible partialit- must be ,onsidered as o/ t3e time t3e motion to dis0uali/- is brou63t. 93e standard is 43et3er a reasonable person kno4in6 all t3e /a,ts and lookin6 at t3e ,ir,umstan,es at t3e present time 4ould 0uestion t3e impartialit- o/ t3e ,ourt. %3) >ud6es M 14&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias or =re5udi,e&&Hb5e,tive $tandard&& :,tivities o/ >ud6e@s Wi/e. ?n a mandamus pro,eedin6 brou63t b- a /arm 4orkers union seekin6 to dis0uali/- t3e trial 5ud6e /or bias )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1* in a ,ourt trial in an a,tion b- a 6ro4er a6ainst t3e union /or dama6es due to union a,tivit- in ,onne,tion 4it3 a strike" t3e trial ,ourt" to 43om t3e motion to dis0uali/- 4as re/erred" did not err in den-in6 t3e motion. $everal 4eeks into t3e trial" t3e trial 5ud6e mentioned to t3e union@s ,ounsel" alle6edl- in/ormall-" t3at 3e 5ust remembered t3at several -ears a6o 3is 4i/e 3ad volunteered to 4ork as a repla,ement 4orker /or t4o to t3ree da-s /or t3e 6ro4er. 93e motion to dis0uali/- t3us alle6ed t3at t3e /a,t o/ su,3 4ork" and t3e 5ud6e@s /ailure to dis,lose t3is /a,t" mi63t ,ause a person to reasonabl- entertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to be impartial in t3e ,ase )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0.1" subd. )a*)%*)C**. Ho4ever" t3e ,ir,umstan,es did not involve t3e 5ud6e dire,tl-" and t3ere 4as no ,urrent personal or /inan,ial interest 43i,3 4ould dis0uali/- t3e 5ud6e. Finall-" even t3ou63 t3e ob5e,tive standard o/ M 1'0.1 does not re0uire proo/ o/ a,tual bias" t3e union /ailed to ,ite a sin6le instan,e o/ ,ondu,t durin6 t3e trial 43i,3 4ould support an in/eren,e o/ partialit-. CH#B$ L !iana L-ons" llen >. 66ers" !aniel :. Car,ia" ?ra L. Cottlieb and Wend- $ones and L-ons" 66ers" Car,ia U Cottlieb /or =etitioner. Bo appearan,e /or Jespondent. >a- W. >e//,oat" >o3n :ll,o,k" Cra-" Car-" :mes U Fr-e" Jonald H. Darsamian" Larr!a4son and !ressler" Wuesenberr-" La4s U Darsamian /or Jeal =art- in ?nterest. W? B J" :,tin6 =. >. 93is midtrial petition /or peremptor- 4rit o/ mandate seekin6 to dis0uali/- t3e trial 5ud6e )Le3n3ardt* presents t3e interestin6 and sensitive 0uestion o/ 5udi,ial re,usal under ne4l- ena,ted Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tions 1'0.1&1'0.5" spe,i/i,all1'0.1" subdivision )a*)%*)C*. FB1/100 )$tats. 19(4" ,3. 1555.* We sa- interestin6 be,ause t3is pro,eedin6 tou,3es upon t3e ,ore o/ t3e 5udi,ial pro,ess&t3e appearan,e o/ ob5e,tivit- o/ t3e de,ision maker&re0uirin6 a ,are/ul balan,in6 o/ t3e a//e,ted interests. Hur de,ision must ,onsider bot3 t3e publi,@s ri63t to be assured o/ t3e /air" but -et e//i,ient" resolution o/ disputes and t3e parties@ ri63t to a de,ision based upon t3e ,ourt@s ob5e,tive evaluation o/ t3e /a,ts and la4. )$ee In re (nited )tates )1st Cir. 19(1* %%% F.2d %90" %94.* 93e tension bet4een t3e appearan,e o/ /airness and e//i,ien,- s3ould be sel/&evident. 93e di//eren,e bet4een t3e appearan,e o/ /airness 6enerall- and t3e per,eption o/ /airness as seen b- a part- or 3is or 3er ,ounsel s3ould also be sel/&evident. Wit3 evermountin6 liti6ation" 5udi,ial dis0uali/i,ation 4ill undoubtedl- ,ontinue to in,rease sin,e 5ud6e s3oppin6 be/ore trial is no4 a 4a- o/ li/e. We also suspe,t t3at 5udi,ial dis0uali/i,ation durin6 trial 4ill in,rease. 93is ,ase is not t3e ve3i,le eit3er to ,riti,iIe or to ,ondone su,3 liti6ation ta,ti,s" 4e understand a parti,ular 5ud6e@s personalit- ,an +make a 4orld o/ di//eren,e 43en it ,omes to rulin6s on eviden,e" t3e temper o/ t3e ,ourtroom" t3e toleran,e /or a pro//ered de/ense" and t3e like.2 ) Chandler v. Judicial Council )19'0* 39( #.$. '4" 13' ;2% L. d.2d 100" 13'&13(" 90 $.Ct. 1%4(< )dis. opn. o/ !ou6las" >.*.* Bonet3eless t3e proper per/orman,e o/ 5udi,ial duties does not re0uire a 5ud6e to 4it3dra4 /rom so,iet- and live an as,eti," antisepti, and so,iall- sterile li/e. >udi,ial responsibilit- does not re0uire s3rinkin6 ever- time an advo,ate asserts t3e ob5e,tive and /air 5ud6e appears to be biased. 93e dut- o/ a 5ud6e to sit

43ere not dis0uali/ied is e0uall- as stron6 as t3e dut- not to sit 43en dis0uali/ied. )$ee Laird v. #atu! )19'2* 409 #.$. (24 ;34 L. d.2d 50" 93 $.Ct. '<" memorandum o/ Je3n0uist" >. at p. (3'.*Hn t3e /a,ts o/ t3is ,ase" 4e den- t3e 4rit. FB1 :ll statutor- re/eren,es are to t3e Code o/ Civil =ro,edure. $e,tion 1'0.1" subdivision )a*)%*)C*" provides in relevant part as /ollo4sF +: 5ud6e shall be dis0uali/ied i/ an- one or more o/ t3e /ollo4in6 is trueF ... ;t3at< ;/<or an- reason ... a person aware o' the 'acts !ight reasona6ly entertain a dou6t t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be able to be impartial .2 )?tali,s added.* ? Ma66io" ?n,. real part- in interest" sued t3e #nited Farm Workers o/ :meri,a" :FL&C?H )#FW* /or substantial dama6es arisin6 out o/ union a,tivit- in ,onne,tion 4it3 a strike in earl- 19'9. 93e ,ase started Mar,3 5" 19(5. Four 4eeks 4ere devoted to 5ur- sele,tion. Counsel ener6eti,all- ,ondu,ted voir dire to eliminate t3ose 5urors 43o ,ould not be impartial be,ause o/ t3eir strike vie4s. ventuall-" t3e parties 6ave up" 4aived 5ur- and stipulated on Mar,3 2'" 19(5" to a ,ourt trial be/ore >ud6e Le3n3ardt. Hn Ma- 24" 19(5" in 43at #FW@s petition alle6es to be +an in/ormal o//&t3e&re,ord ,onversation"2 >ud6e Le3n3ardt mentioned to #FW ,ounsel t3at 3is 4i/e 3ad volunteered /or and 4orked t4o to t3ree da-s as a repla,ement 4orker in a ,arrot s3ed o4ned b- Ma66io. /101 >ud6e C3aille advised t3e parties t3e dis0uali/i,ation motion 4ould be de,ided based +entirel- on t3e de,larations submitted b- ;t3e #FW< and >ud6e Le3n3ardt.2 )$ee 6enerall- "arcia v. )uperior Court )19(4* 15% Cal.:pp.3d %'0" %''&%'( ;203 Cal.Jptr. 290<" 0uotin6 ?i:6y v. *otchkis )1945* '2 Cal.:pp.2d 3%(" 3'3&3'4 ;1%4 =.2d (0(<.* He /ound Mrs. Le3n3ardt did 4ork /or Ma66io /or t4o da-s in 19'9" >ud6e Le3n3ardt 3ad /or6otten t3e in,ident and" a/ter 32 da-s o/ trial" t3en remembered and ,alled it to t3e attention o/ ,ounsel. >ud6e C3aille ,on,ludedF +;9<3ere is no eviden,e t3at >ud6e Le3n3ardt 3ad an-t3in6 to do 4it3 t3e 2&da- 4orkda- ;sic< o/ 3is 4i/e and 3e kne4 about it at t3e time and ? /ail to see in modern so,iet- 43ere t3is 4ould advo,ate animpropriet- or in/luen,e t3e 5ud6e mi63t /eel in de,idin6 t3is ,ase. +93e ,ourt spe,i/i,all- /inds t3ere is no reason 43- a person 4ould reasonablentertain a doubt t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ould be unable to be impartial be,ause siA -ears a6o t3e 5ud6e@s 4i/e 4orked /or plainti// /or a period o/ t4o da-s.2 Follo4in6 >ud6e C3aille@s rulin6" t3e #FW /iled t3is petition /or 4rit o/ mandate. ?? LL?n 19(4" se,tions 1'0" 1'0a and 1'0.1 re6ardin6 dis0uali/i,ation o/ 5ud6es /or bias or ,ause 4ere repla,ed b- se,tions 1'0.1&1'0.5. )$tats. 19(4" ,3. 1555.* $upport /or t3e ne4l- ena,ted statute ,ame /rom t3e Cali/ornia $tate Dar 43ose Committee on :dministration o/ >usti,e dra/ted t3e initial provisions. For t3e most part" t3e revision 4as an e//ort to ,lari/- and simpli/- t3e previous la4 b- addin6 ,on,epts and lan6ua6e /rom t3e Code o/ >udi,ial Condu,t prepared b- a spe,ial :D: ,ommittee ,3aired b- /ormer C3ie/ >usti,e 9ra-nor )9ra-nor Code* in 19'2 and adopted b- t3e Cali/ornia >ud6es :sso,iation in 19'5. : We are una4are o/ an- ,ases attemptin6 to interpret and appl- t3e ne4 se,tion 1'0.1. :s noted" 3o4ever" it 4as based on ,on,epts ,ontained in t3e 9ra-nor Code 43i,3 in,ludes a provision analo6ous to subdivision /103 )a*)%*)C*" re0uirin6

dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e 43ere +3is impartialit- mi63t reasonabl- be 0uestioned.2 ):D: Code o/ >ud. Condu,t" ,anon 3C.* 93is ob5e,tive approa,3 to t3e 0uestion o/ 5udi,ial partialit- also served as t3e 6enesis /or a ,orrespondin6 /ederal statute" 2( #nited $tates Code se,tion 455)a* adopted b- Con6ress in 19'4" 43i,3 provides t3at +;a<n- ... 5ud6e ... s3all dis0uali/- 3imsel/ in an- pro,eedin6 in 43i,3 3is impartialit- mi63t reasonabl- be 0uestioned....2 )$ee 6enerall- )tate o' Idaho v. ree!an )!.?da3o 19(1* 50' F.$upp. '0%" '1'&'19.* $e,tion 1'0" 43i,3 introdu,es t3e dis0uali/i,ation statutes" is a ne4 se,tion eApressin6 t3e proposition 4e noted earlier t3at +;a< 5ud6e 3as a dut- to de,ide anpro,eedin6 in 43i,3 3e or s3e is not dis0uali/ied.2 93e le6islative 3istor- s3o4s t3is se,tion 4as prompted b- statements su66estin6 t3at ,ertain 5ud6es did not believe t3e3ad su,3 a dut-. )$ee $lson v. Cory )19(0* 2' Cal.3d 532" 5'%&5'( ;1'( Cal.Jptr. 5%(" %3% =.2d 532<.* 93us" t3e se,tion serves to remind 5ud6es o/ t3eir dut- to 3ear ,ases 43i,3 are ,ontroversial and mi63t sub5e,t t3em to publi, disapproval as 4ell as to prote,t t3em /rom publi, ,riti,ism b- a ,lear statement o/ t3eir responsibilit-. LLFor our purposes" t3e ke- ,3an6e in t3e ne4 statutes is /ound in subdivision )a*)%* )C* o/ se,tion 1'0.1 43i,3 provides /or dis0uali/i,ation 43enever a 5ud6e@s impartialit- mi63t reasonabl- be 0uestioned. )Ante" /n. 1.* 93is subdivision ,3an6es t3e la4 in t3at t3e previous ,orrespondin6 statute" se,tion 1'0" subdivision )a*)5* )repealed b- $tats. 19(4" ,3. 1555" M 1*" 43i,3 ,ould be read as appl-in6 to t3e appearan,e o/ bias" 3ad been ,onstrued to re0uire bias in /a,t. ) Andrews v. Agricultural La6or Belations ?d. )19(1* 2( Cal.3d '(1" '92&'93 ;1'1 Cal.Jptr. 590" %23 =.2d 151<.* 93e reason 6iven /or t3e ,3an6e is t3e di//i,ult- in s3o4in6 t3at a 5ud6e is biased unless t3e 5ud6e so admits. ?n addition" publi, per,eptions o/ 5usti,e are not /urt3ered 43en a 5ud6e 43o is reasonabl- t3ou63t to be biased in a matter 3ears t3e ,ase. W3ile t3e lan6ua6e in t3e /ederal statute and t3e 9ra-nor Code is virtuall- identi,al" subdivision )a*)%*)C* is ,ou,3ed in t3e some43at di//erent terms o/ +a person a4are o/ t3e /a,ts ... reasonabl- entertain;in6< ... doubt;s<2 re6ardin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-. 93is sli63tl- di//erent 6loss on t3e 9ra-nor Code ,on,ept appears to be derived /rom&or at least ,losel- tra,ks&interpretive lan6ua6e in a number o/ /ederal ,ases. ?llustrative is t3e Fi/t3 Cir,uit Court o/ :ppeals@ de,ision in Potashnick v. Port City Const. Co. )5t3 Cir. 19(0* %09 F.2d 1101" 1111 ;54 :.L.J.Fed. (25<F +#se o/ t3e 4ord @mi63t@ in t3e statute 4as intended to indi,ate t3at dis0uali/i,ation s3ould /ollo4 i/ t3e reasonable man" 4ere 3e to kno4 all t3e ,ir,umstan,es" /104 4ould 3arbor doubts about t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-.2 )$ee also" e.6." (nited )tates v. erguson )$.!.B.K. 19(2* 550 F.$upp. 125%" 12%0 )+43et3er a reasonable member o/ t3e publi, at lar6e" a4are o/ all t3e /a,ts" mi63t /airl- 0uestion t3e Court@s impartialit-2*.* 93e lan6ua6e apparentl- 3ad its 6enesis in t3e Jeporter@s Botes to t3e 9ra-nor Code. )$ee Bote" AisEuali'ication o' Judges and Justices in the ederal Courts )19'3* (% Harv.L.Jev. '3%" '45.*93us" absent Cali/ornia pre,edent on point" 4e ma- pro/itabl- look to /ederal ,ases interpretin6 se,tion 455)a* /or 6uidan,e in distillin6 some basi, prin,iples. LL)1*93e standard /or dis0uali/i,ation provided /or in subdivision )a*)%*)C* o/ se,tion 1'0.1 is /undamentall- an ob5e,tive one. ?t represents a le6islative 5ud6ment t3at due to t3e sensitivit- o/ t3e 0uestion and in3erent di//i,ulties o/ proo/ as 4ell as t3e importan,e o/ publi, ,on/iden,e in t3e 5udi,ial s-stem" t3e issue is not limited to t3e eAisten,e o/ an a,tual bias. Jat3er" i/ a reasonable man 4ould entertain doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-" dis0uali/i,ation is mandated. +9o ensure t3at t3e pro,eedin6s appear to t3e publi, to be impartial and 3en,e 4ort3o/ t3eir ,on/iden,e" t3e situation must be vie4ed t3rou63 t3e e-es o/ t3e ob5e,tive person.2 ) In re (nited )tates" supra." %%% F.2d at p. %947 see also Matter o' )earches Conducted on March .% 3-81 ) .!.Wis,. 19(0* 49' F.$upp. 12(3" 1290.*W3ile

t3is ob5e,tive standard ,learl- indi,ates t3at t3e de,ision on dis0uali/i,ation not be based on t3e 5ud6e@s personal vie4 o/ 3is o4n impartialit-" FB3 it also su66ests t3at t3e liti6ants@ ne,essaril- partisan vie4s not provide t3e appli,able /rame o/ re/eren,e. )$ee (nited )tates v. Cowden )1st Cir. 19'%* 545 F.2d 25'" 2%57 (nion Independiente v. Puerto Bico Legal )ervices )!.=.J. 19(2* 550 F.$upp. 1109" 1111.*Jat3er" +a 5ud6e /a,ed 4it3 a potential 6round /or dis0uali/i,ation ou63t to ,onsider 3o4 3is parti,ipation in a 6iven ,ase looks to t3e avera6e person on t3e street.2 ) Potashnick v. Port City Const. Co." supra." %09 F.2d at p. 11117 a,,ord (nited )tates v. erguson" supra." 550 F.$upp. at p. 12%0.* FB3 Consistent 4it3 t3is prin,iple" subdivision ),*)5* o/ se,tion 1'0.3 providesF +Bo 5ud6e 43o re/uses to re,use 3imsel/ or 3ersel/ s3all pass upon 3is or 3er o4n dis0uali/i,ation .... ?n ever- su,3 ,ase" t3e 0uestion o/ dis0uali/i,ation s3all be 3eard and determined b- anot3er 5ud6e ....2 8arious /a,tors ma- impa,t on 3o4 t3e +avera6e person on t3e street2 vie4s a 5ud6e@s parti,ipation in a ,ase. Hne ,ourt 3as per,eptivel- re,o6niIed t3at all ot3er t3in6s bein6 e0ual" t3e need /or dis0uali/i,ation de,reases b- t3e eAtent to 43i,3 t3e 5ud6e@s rulin6s in t3e ,ase are limited to purel- le6al matters. ) )tate o' Idaho v. ree!an" supra." 50' F.$upp. at p. '2(.*93is is be,ause a trial 5ud6e@s /a,tual /indin6s are 6enerall- a,,orded ,onsiderable de/eren,e 43ereas le6al rulin6s are sub5e,t to plenar- appellate /102 revie4.)I6id.7 see 6enerall- *urtado v. )tatewide *o!e Loan Co. )19(5* 1%' Cal.:pp.3d 1019" 1023&1025 ;213 Cal.Jptr. '12<.* 0uallsi6ni/i,ant" t3e ,ir,umstan,es 6ivin6 rise to suspi,ions o/ partialit- rarel- involve t3e le6al posture o/ t3e ,ase. )2*?t is also important to note" espe,iall- in t3e ,onteAt o/ t3e present ,ase" t3at t3e /a,ts and ,ir,umstan,es bearin6 on t3e 5ud6e@s possible partialit- must be ,onsidered as o/ t3e time t3e motion is brou63t. +93e standard ... is 43et3er a reasonable person kno4in6 all o/ t3e /a,ts and lookin6 at t3e ,ir,umstan,es at the present ti!e 4ould 0uestion t3e impartialit- o/ t3e Court.2 ) Matter o' )earches" supra." 49' F.$upp. at p. 1291" itali,s added.* D )3*De,ause t3e /a,tors in t3e present ,ase do not point ,onsistentl- eit3er in /avor o/ or a6ainst dis0uali/i,ation" 4e re6ard t3is as a ver- ,lose issue. Hn one 3and" t3e ,ir,umstan,es relied upon b- t3e #FW in support o/ t3e motion do not involve >ud6e Le3n3ardt dire,tl-. Jat3er" 3e is suspe,ted be,ause o/ 3is 4i/e@s a,tivit-. W3atever ma- 3ave been true in -ears past" it is no4 simpl- impossible and un4arranted to treat 4omen as mere s3ado4s o/ t3eir 3usbands@ identities. >ud6e C3aille@s denial o/ t3e dis0uali/i,ation motion 4as based in lar6e part on 3is understandin6 o/ t3is /a,tF +We do not live in ,olonial da-s 43ere 4omen@s emplo-ment is determined b- men.... ;W<omen ;do not< 3ave to 3ave t3e ,onsent o/ t3eir 3usbands to do t3in6s.2 LLWe re,o6niIe t3at ot3er parts o/ t3e dis0uali/i,ation statute re/er to t3e involvement o/ a 5ud6e@s spouse. Dut t3ose re/eren,es are in t3e ,onteAt o/ parties or la4-ers in t3e pro,eedin6 )M 1'0.1" subds. )a*)4* and )5**" t3e spouse@s /inan,ial interests )id." subd. )a*)3** or t3e spouse as a material 4itness )id." subd. )a* )1**. Here t3e #FW ,annot rel- on an- ,ontinuin6 relations3ip bet4een Ma66io and Mrs. Le3n3ardt 6ivin6 rise to an- ,urrent personal or /inan,ial interest 43i,3 4ould dis0uali/- >ud6e Le3n3ardt. Jat3er" it must ne,essaril- su66est t3at Mrs. Le3n3ardt@s 4illin6ness to 4ork /or t4o da-s durin6 t3e strike 4ould ,ause a reasonable person to in/er t3at >ud6e Le3n3ardt 4ould eit3er /avor Ma66io or be biased a6ainst t3e union. FB4 93is despite t3e /a,t t3ere is no eviden,e t3at Mrs. Le3n3ardt 4as in an- /106 4ainvolved in an- o/ t3e events at issue in t3e underl-in6 la4suit. We 4ill not belabor t3e tenuousness o/ t3e pro//ered in/eren,e.

FB4 93e #FW@s ,3ara,teriIation o/ Mrs. Le3n3ardt as a +strikebreaker2 )ante" p. 101* ma- be intended to su66est somet3in6 re6ardin6 t3e motivation /or 3er 4orkin6 in Ma66io@s ,arrot s3ed. We 4is3 to emp3asiIe t3at t3e re,ord is devoid o/ an- eviden,e as to 43at motivated Mrs. Le3n3ardt and our resolution o/ t3is issue dra4s no in/eren,es as to 43- s3e ,3ose to 4ork /or Ma66io durin6 t3e strike. LLHn t3e ot3er 3and" >ud6e Le3n3ardt is the /a,t/inder in t3e ,ase. His in/luen,e is not limited to revie4able le6al rulin6s. He 4ill de,ide t3e ,ase. D- virtue o/ 3is 4i/e@s a,tions" >ud6e Le3n3ardt@s eAperien,e 4it3 t3e strike 4as per3aps more personal t3an ot3ers@. FB5 ?t is impossible to sa- 3o4 subtl- su,3 an eAperien,e mi63t ,olor 3is vie4 o/ t3e /a,ts presented at trial. FB5 We 0uali/- t3is observation b- notin6 t3at ?mperial Count- is a small" ,losel- knit ,ommunit- e,onomi,all- dependent on a6ri,ulture. ?t ma- be virtuall- impossible to /ind ,ount- residents 43o 4ere not personall- a//e,ted to a 6reater or lesser eAtent b- t3e strike. C We are" o/ ,ourse" bound b- >ud6e C3aille@s /a,tual /indin6s re6ardin6 t3e ,ir,umstan,es o/ >ud6e Le3n3ardt@s /ailure to brin6 t3e underl-in6 /a,ts to t3e attention o/ ,ounsel until nearl- t4o mont3s into t3e trial. >ud6e C3aille /ound t3at >ud6e Le3n3ardt 3ad /or6otten about 3is 4i/e@s 4ork /or Ma66io and onl- remembered it 43en some testimon- durin6 t3e trial re/res3ed 3is re,olle,tion. We do not doubt t3e sin,erit- o/ t3e #FW@s representations t3at 3ad it kno4n o/ Mrs. Le3n3ardt@s 4ork be/ore trial" it eit3er 4ould 3ave eAer,ised a se,tion 1'0.% peremptor- ,3allen6e o/ >ud6e Le3n3ardt or 4ould not 3ave 4aived its ri63t to a 5ur-. FB%Bonet3eless" absent some mis,ondu,t on t3e 5ud6e@s part 43i,3 is not present 3ere" su,3 intentions must be deemed irrelevant 43en t3e trial is t4o mont3s old and t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ t3e trial 5ud6e is 6overned eA,lusivel- b- se,tions 1'0.1 t3rou63 1'0.3. Were t3e rule ot3er4ise" a part- per,eivin6 its /ortunes at trial 4anin6 mi63t o/ten ,laim dis,overo/ a /a,t 43i,3 ,3an6ed its per,eptions re6ardin6 t3e advisabilit- o/ peremptoril,3allen6in6 t3e trial 5ud6e or 4aivin6 a 5ur-. FB% :s 4e 3ave noted" t3e partisan liti6ant emotionall- involved in t3e ,ontrovers- underl-in6 t3e la4suit is not t3e disinterested ob5e,tive observer 43ose doubts ,on,ernin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit- provide t3e 6overnin6 standard. )Ante" p. 104.* For t3is reason" t3e /arm4orkers@ de,laration eApressin6 ,on,ern re6ardin6 >ud6e Le3n3ardt" 43ile undoubtedl- sin,ere" is o/ little persuasive /or,e. ?n addition" t3eir statements re6ardin6 t3e sentiments o/ +man- members o/ our ,ommunit-2 must be treated as inadmissible 3earsa-. )I6id.* Finall-" >ud6e Le3n3ardt@s ,ondu,t o/ t3e trial until no4 must be ,onsidered as eviden,e o/ 3is impartialit-. FB'!espite 32 da-s o/ administerin6 t3e pro,eedin6s" rulin6 on ob5e,tions" et,." t3e #FW /ails to ,ite a sin6le instan,e o/ >ud6e Le3n3ardt@s ,ondu,t 43i,3 4ould support an in/eren,e o/ /101 partialit-. )Compare In re (nited )tates" supra." %%% F.2d at p. %9'" 43ere a part- sou63t dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e /or retrial and pointed to spe,i/i, rulin6s in t3e /irst trial 43i,3 it su66ested 4ere t3e produ,t o/ bias.* W3ile it is true t3at 4it3 t3e ena,tment o/ t3e ne4 se,tion 1'0.1" a part- seekin6 dis0uali/i,ation no lon6er need prove t3e 5ud6e is a,tuall- biased" 4e believe t3at reasonable persons vie4in6 +;all< t3e ,ir,umstan,es at t3e present time2 )ante" p. 105* 4ould be mu,3 less likel- to 0uestion a 5ud6e@s impartialit- i/ t3e- kne4 t3e 5ud6e 3ad alread- impartiall- presided over ei63t 4eeks o/ trial. 93e proo/" as t3e- sa-" is in t3e puddin6.

FB' We 3ave vie4ed t3e e,onomi, aspe,ts o/ t3e ,ase&in terms o/ t3e parties@ and ,ourt@s eApenditure o/ time and resour,es&as 4ei63tless. W3ile t3e 4aste o/ ei63t trial 4eeks 4ould be un/ortunate" t3e parties@ ri63t to a /air trial ,annot be ,ompromised b- su,3 ,onsiderations. 93e petition /or mandate is denied. al5er Min. Co. v. Ind$strial (cc. Co66ission, 32 Cal.(...2d 221, ,2 +.2d 188, 4 Cal. Co6.. Cases 211 %Cal.(... 3 -ist., 4ct 23, 1,3,) )4* Workmen@s Compensation&&Fair 9rial&& viden,e&&Witnesses&&Courts&& ?n3erent =o4ers. 93e administration o/ 5usti,e is /ounded on t3e prin,iple t3at ever- liti6ant s3all 3ave a /air opportunit- to present to t3e ,ourt material eviden,e in support o/ 3is valid ,laim" and one o/ t3e duties 43i,3 a ,itiIen o4es to 3is 6overnment is to support t3e administration o/ 5usti,e b- attendin6 its ,ourts and 6ivin6 3is testimon43en 3e is properl- summoned7 and it is 4it3in t3e in3erent po4ers o/ ,ourts and 5udi,ial tribunals to ,ompel t3e attendan,e o/ 4itnesses ne,essar- to a 5ust determination o/ proper issues" and su,3 aut3orit- is ne,essaril- in,ident to t3e po4er to ad5udi,ate a ,ause. t3e pro,eedin6 4as dismissed b- dire,tion o/ t3e Cali/ornia ,ommission" 4it3out noti,e or ,onsent" and 4it3out an opportunit- /or /urt3er medi,al eAamination or to ,ross& eAamine t3e ,laimant. ?t is ,ontended t3e dismissal o/ t3at pro,eedin6 and t3e re/usal to permit t3e ri63t to eAamine t3e ,laimant re6ardin6 3is present p3-si,al ,ondition ,onstitutes a denial o/ due pro,ess and an eA,ess o/ 5urisdi,tion on t3e part o/ t3e ,ommission. We are o/ t3e opinion o/ t3e Cali/ornia ?ndustrial :,,ident Commission eA,eeded its 5urisdi,tion in submittin6 and determinin6 t3e insurer@s petition to terminate its liabilit- 4it3out permittin6 it to obtain a medi,al eAamination to as,ertain t3e present p3-si,al ,ondition o/ t3e ,laimant" and to ,ross&eAamine 3im in t3at re6ard. ?n e//e,t" t3at rulin6 amounted to a denial o/ t3e insurer@s ,onstitutional ri63t to due pro,ess b- re/usin6 to permit it to ,ross&eAamine a 4itness upon a material issue. ?n t3e ,ase o/ )aunders v. )haw% 244 #. $. 31' ;3' $up. Ct. %3(" %1 L. d. 11%3<" it 4as 3eld t3at t3e submission and determination o/ a ,ase 4it3out 6ivin6 a part- t3ereto t3e opportunit- o/ presentin6 3is eviden,e on a material issue resulted in a denial o/ due pro,ess 6uaranteed b- t3e /ourteent3 amendment to t3e /ederal Constitution. )4* 93e administration o/ 5usti,e is /ounded on t3e prin,iple t3at ever- liti6ant s3all 3ave a /air opportunit- to present to t3e ,ourt material eviden,e in support o/ 3is valid ,laim.

Bot able to state" under dispara6ement title" ? 4as entitled to t3e dama6es /or +time and in,onvenien,e spent2 pre5ud6ement Cal Const :rt1 $e,' !ue =ro,ess ?n a demurrer /a,tual statements pleadin6 ,auses o/ bases ,auses o/ a,tion must be taken as true. #tiliIe ,ase la4 /rom Jutter1s7 C D ?mproper to simpl- disre6ard un,ontradi,ted a//idvits

Gneeland v. Ethicon S$t$re La*oratories, Inc., 118 Cal.(...2d 211, 221 +.2d 121 %Cal.(... 1 -ist., Ma3 2,, 1,23)

)2* :ppeal and rror M 12((&&Wuestions o/ La4 and Fa,t&&W3ere viden,e is !o,umentar-. :lt3ou63 on revie4 o/ an order rendered on ,on/li,tin6 a//idavits t3e re,ord must be vie4ed most /avorabl- to" and ,on/li,ts resolved in /avor o/" respondent" un,ontradi,ted and unimpea,3ed portions o/ t3e a//idavits manot be arbitraril- disre6arded.
. Ho4ever" un,ontradi,ted and unimpea,3ed testimon- ,annot ar6itrarily be disre6arded. )$ee Mantonya v. ?ratlie% 33 Cal.2d 120 ; 199 =.2d %''<7 Ao6son v. Ao6son% (% Cal.:pp.2d 13 ; 193 =.2d '94<.* Manton3a v. &ratlie, 33 Cal.2d 120, 1,, +.2d 611, 13 Cal. Co6.. Cases 282 %Cal., 'ov 23, 1,48)

Case limited and applied to /a,ts o/ determinin6 an independent ,ontra,tor.

%2) Witnesses M 29')1*&&!etermination o/ Credibilit-&&!isre6ardin6 9estimon-. 93e trier o/ /a,t is not entitled" arbitraril- or on mere ,apri,e" to disre6ard un,ontradi,ted" entirel- probable testimon- o/ unimpea,3ed 4itnesses. )5* Dut t3e trier o/ /a,t is not entitled" arbitraril- or upon mere ,apri,e" to disre6ard un,ontradi,ted" entirel- probable testimon- o/ unimpea,3ed 4itnesses. -o*son v. -o*son, 86 Cal.(...2d 13, 1,3 +.2d 1,4 %Cal.(... 2 -ist., J$n 03, 1,48) %1) Witnesses M 29')1*&&!etermination o/ Credibilit-&&#n,ontradi,ted 9estimon-. 9estimon- 43i,3 is not in3erentl- improbable and is not impea,3ed or ,ontradi,ted bot3er eviden,e must be a,,epted as true b- t3e trier o/ /a,t. $ee 2' Cal.J$r. 1(4. Was the trial 7udge correct in re7ecting the uncontradicted% una!6iguous% uni!peached% plain and pro6a6le testi!ony o' plainti'' and his corro6orating witnessJ LL)1* 93is 0uestion must be ans4ered in t3e ne6ative and is 6overned b- t3is ruleF 9estimon- 43i,3 is not in3erentl- improbable and is not impea,3ed or ,ontradi,ted bot3er eviden,e must be a,,epted as true b- t3e trier o/ /a,t. ) )hepard v. )hepard% %5 Cal.:pp. 310" 313 et se0. ; 223 =. 1012<. $ee also "o!eC v. Cecena% 15 Cal.2d 3%3" 3%% ; 101 =.2d 4''<.* )2* :ppl-in6 t3e /ore6oin6 rule to t3e /a,ts o/ t3e instant ,ase" it is apparent t3at t3e trial 5ud6e 4as in error in arbitraril- re/usin6 to a,,ept t3e testimon- o/ plainti// as true. $u,3 testimon- 4as un,ontradi,ted" unambi6uous" unimpea,3ed and plain. 93e testimon- 4as also not inherently i!pro6a6le.?t is a matter o/ ,ommon kno4led6e t3at o,,asionall- /12 parties submit to a marria6e ,eremon- 43en one o/ t3e persons is under t3e in/luen,e o/ an intoAi,atin6 bevera6e to t3e eAtent t3at su,3 person is o/ unsound mind and does not kno4 43at is takin6 pla,e" t3us bein6 unable to enter into a ,ontra,t. ) Mc=ee v. Mc=ee% 49 Bev. 90 ;23' =. 534<. $ee also ,ases ,ited in 2( :.L.J. )1924* p. %4(.* ?n su,3 ,ase t3e intoAi,ated parti,ipant is entitled to 3ave t3e marria6e annulled. ) Aunphy v. Aunphy% 1%1 Cal. 3(0 ;119 =. 512" :nn. Cas. 1913D 1230" 3( L.J.:.B.$. (1(<.* ?n vie4 o/ t3e eviden,e it 4as t3e dut- o/ t3e trial ,ourt to /ind t3at plainti// at t3e time o/ t3e purported marria6e ,eremon- 4as so inebriated t3at 3e did not kno4

43at 3e 4as doin6 and to a4ard 3im an annulment o/ t3e purported marria6e. For t3e /ore6oin6 reasons" t3e 5ud6ment is reversed and t3e trial ,ourt is dire,ted to enter a de,ree in a,,ordan,e 4it3 t3e pra-er o/ plainti//@s ,omplaint. 9o6e= v. Cecena, 12 Cal.2d 363, 101 +.2d 411 %Cal.,(.r 12, 1,40) //%1) viden,e&&9estimon-&&Wei63t. W3ile no universal and immutable /ormula ,an be pres,ribed /or determinin6 t3e 4ei63t to be a,,orded testimonial eviden,e" testimon- 43i,3 is not in3erentl- improbable and is not impea,3ed or ,ontradi,ted b- ot3er eviden,e s3ould be a,,epted as true b- t3e trier o/ /a,t. )1* W3ile no universal and immutable /ormula ,an be pres,ribed /or determinin6 t3e 4ei63t to be a,,orded testimonial eviden,e" it 3as /re0uentl- been said t3at testimon43i,3 is not in3erentl- improbable and is not impea,3ed or ,ontradi,ted b- ot3er eviden,e s3ould be a,,epted as true b- t3e trier o/ /a,t. ) Michaels v. Paci'ic )o't Water Laundry% 104 Cal. :pp. 3%% ; 2(% =a,. 1'2<7 )hepard v. )hepard% %5 Cal. :pp. 310 ; 223 =a,. 1012<7 *ynes v. White% 4' Cal. :pp. 549 ; 190 =a,. (3%<7 Lee )ing ar v. (nited )tates% 94 Fed. (347 see Wi6more on viden,e" 2d ed." se,. 2034.* She.ard v. She.ard, 62 Cal.(... 310, 223 +. 1012 %Cal.(... 1 -ist.,Jan 11, 1,24)

Has a bad distin6uis3ed ,ase in t3e ot3er ,ases ,itin6 to it.

;2< ?!.&&#BCHB9J:!?C9 ! 9 $9?MHBK&&$#$=?C?HB$ HF 9J?:L CH#J9&&>#!CM B9. ?n an a,tion /or divor,e on t3e 6round o/ eAtreme ,ruelt-" based upon t3e relations o/ t3e 3usband 4it3 ot3er 4omen" 43ere t3e testimon- o/ t3e plainti//" 43i,3 is un,ontradi,ted" is plain and unambi6uous and ,learl- establis3es t3e alle6ations o/ ,ruelt-" and su,3 testimon- is ampl- ,orroborated" t3e trial ,ourt ma- not re5e,t su,3 eviden,e and den- t3e divor,e" basin6 3is 5ud6ment upon 3is o4n suspi,ions arisin6 outside o/ t3e re,ord. )2* We ,ome" t3en" to t3e onl- point o/ la4 involved on t3is appeal" and t3at is 43et3er t3e trial ,ourt ma- re5e,t all t3e eviden,e in t3e ,ase and base 3is 5ud6ment upon 3is o4n suspi,ions arisin6 outside o/ t3e re,ord. 93e last eApression/314 o/ t3e supreme ,ourt is /ound in t3e ,on,urrin6 opinion o/ Mr. >usti,e Lennon in )tewart v. )ilva% 192 Cal. 405 ; 221 =a,. 191<" in 43i,3 3e sa-s +t3at it is t3e 6eneral rule t3at t3e un,ontradi,ted and unimpea,3ed testimon- o/ a 4itness tendin6 to establis3 an issuable /a,t in t3e ,ase ma- not be arbitraril- disre6arded b- t3e trial ,ourt. ) *ayward v. Bogers% %2 Cal. 34(" 3'27 "age v. ?illing% 12 Cal. :pp. %(( ; 10( =a,. %%4<7 10 Cal. >ur." p. 1143.* 9o t3e ,ontrar-" su,3 testimon- must be a,,epted as proo/ o/ t3e /a,t 43i,3 it is o//ered to establis3 unless it ,an be said t3at su,3 testimon- is so in3erentl- in,redible and improbable as to amount to no eviden,e at all. ) *utchinson v. *olland% 4' Cal. :pp. '10 ; 190 =a,. 10'2<7 *ynes v. White% 4' Cal. :pp. 549 ; 190 =a,. (3%<.*2

:ll o/ t3e ,ases ,itin6 t3at errors o/ la4 does not ,onstitute bias and pre5udi,e" 4ere rendered be/ore t3e ,3an6e o/ t3e dis0uali/i,ation statutes in 19(4. =revented $oon C3e- /rom 3avin6 a meanin6/ul 3earin6 on t3e issues. 8iolated t3e separation o/ po4ers do,trine

$e,tion 1(5( Constu,tion o/ statutes" or instruments7 dut- o/ 5ud6e" o/ t3e Civil Code o/ =ro,edure o/ t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia $e,tion 9%03 ,onstru,tion o/ statutes o/ t3e Covernment Code o/ t3e $tate o/ Cali/ornia" 93e 6eneral rules /or ,onstru,tion o/ statutes are ,ontained in preliminar- provisions o/ t3e di//erent ,odes.

#ansen v. #ansen, 233 Cal.(...2d 212, 43 Cal.:.tr. 12, %Cal.(... 1 -ist., (.r 14, 1,62) 93e ,ondu,t re/erred to must be evaluated in t3e li63t o/ establis3ed prin,iples 6overnin6 t3e ,ondu,t o/ a trial 5ud6e. ) '* ?t is 6enerall- statedF +93e trial o/ a ,ase s3ould not onl- be /air in /a,t" but it s3ould also appear to be /air.2 ) Pratt v. Pratt )1903* 141 Cal. 24'" 252 ; '4 =. '42<7 see also We66er v. We66er )194(* 33 Cal.2d 153" 155 ; 199 =.2d 934<7 ?raw!an v. ?raw!an )19%2* 199 Cal.:pp.2d ('%" ((0& ((1" ((3 ; 19 Cal.Jptr. 10%<7 Mc&ey v. Mc&ey )1955* 132 Cal.:pp.2d 120" 123 ; 2(1 =.2d (9(<7 and Bosen'ield v. &osper )1941* 45 Cal.:pp.2d 3%5" 3'2 ; 114 =.2d 29<.* )(* : prime ,orollar- o/ t3e /ore6oin6 rule is t3at +: trial 5ud6e s3ould not pre5ud6e t3e issues but s3ould keep an open mind until all t3e eviden,e is presented to 3im.2 ) Bosen'ield v. &osper% supra% at p. 3'17 and see We66er v. We66er% supra% at p. 1%17 Mc&ey v. Mc&ey% supra% at p. 1237 and Ael Buth v. Ael Buth )194%* '5 Cal.:pp.2d %3(" %4( ; 1'1 =.2d 34<.* 93e /ore6oin6 ,ases" 4it3 t3e eA,eption o/ t3e t3en noneAistent Mc&ey ,ase" FB' are revie4ed and distin6uis3ed in Weil v. Weil )1951* 3' Cal.2d ''0" '(4&'(% ; 23% =.2d 159<" 43erein t3e opinion ,on,ludesF + a,3 o/ t3e ,ited ,ases in 43i,3 trial 5ud6es 3ave been /ound 6uilt- o/ mis,ondu,t ;,itation< 3as di//ered substantiall- /rom t3e ot3ers7 none o/ t3em ,an be a ,ontrollin6 pre,edent in a ne4 situation in 43i,3 ne4 /a,t 0uestions are presented. !i//eren,es in t3e nature o/ t3e liti6ation" /282 t3e parti,ular ,omments or ,ondu,t o/ t3e trial 5ud6e" t3e s,ope and reliabilit- o/ a//idavits b- parties and attorne-s" and t3e state o/ t3e eviden,e at t3e trial make it essential t3at ea,3 ,ase turn upon its o4n /a,ts.2 )=. '(%7 see also *utchinson v. *utchinson )19%3* 223 Cal.:pp.2d 494" 510&511 ; 3% Cal.Jptr. %3<7 "ardner v. Mo6il $il Co. )19%3* 21' Cal.:pp.2d 220" 225 ; 31 Cal.Jptr. '31<7 "ary v. Avery )19%0* 1'( Cal.:pp.2d 5'4" 5'9 ; 3 Cal.Jptr. 20<7 and ?arr v. ?arr )1953* 119 Cal.:pp.2d 5((" 591 ; 259 =.2d 95'<.* estern (ir Lines, Inc. v. Sch$t=*an5, 228 Cal.(...2d 218, 66 Cal.:.tr. 2,3, &l$e S53 L. :e.. + 10,162 %Cal.(... 2 -ist. Jan 22, 1,68)

Case 43i,3 provides ba,k6round in/ormation /or Weil v. Weil

eil v. eil, 31 Cal.2d 110, 236 +.2d 12, %Cal., 4ct 11, 1,21) )1a* 93e 5ud6e@s statement t3at 3e did not believe in separate maintenan,e /or s3ort marria6es does not" in our opinion" eviden,e an un4illin6ness to tr- de/endant@s ,ase a,,ordin6 to la4. )2* : 5ud6e is not re0uired to approve ever- statute or pre,edent b- 43i,3 3is de,ision is 6overned. Like ot3er ,itiIens 3e is bound" not to believe in a parti,ular la4" but to obe- it. 93us" 3e ma- doubt t3e 4isdom o/ parti,ular e,onomi, le6islation" but it is nevert3eless 3is dut- to en/or,e it in a proper ,ase. )3* : 5ud6e 43o disa6rees 4it3 t3e poli,- o/ a statute is not ne,essaril- dis0uali/ied /rom 3earin6 a ,ase in 43i,3 t3at statute must be applied. )1b* ?n t3e present ,ase" t3ere 3as been no s3o4in6 t3at t3e 5ud6e@s opposition to separate maintenan,e /or s3ort

marria6es 4as an-t3in6 more t3an a personal opinion ,on,ernin6 t3e 4isdom o/ t3e le6islation involved. :,,ordin6 to t3e =a,3t a//idavit" t3e 5ud6e stated t3at on t3is issue R3is mind 3ad not been made up and 4ould be kept open.R W3elan@s a//idavit also s3o4s t3at t3e 5ud6e@s observation 4as 0uali/ied" /or it 0uotes 3im as sa-in6 t3at 3e did not believe separate maintenan,e s3ould be 6ranted in t3is ,ase Runless t3ere 4as additional eviden,e t3at 3e 3adn@t 3eard.R Had 3e re6arded len6t3 o/ marria6e as a ,ontrollin6 ,ir,umstan,e" Radditional eviden,eR 4ould 3ave made no di//eren,e to 3im. 93e aut3orities ,ited b- de/endant are not in,onsistent 4it3 t3e result 3ere rea,3ed. ?n We66er v. We66er% 33 Cal.2d 153 ;199 =.2d 934<" 43ere t3e 4i/e sou63t and 4as 6ranted a divor,e" part o/ 3er ,ase 4as un0uestionabl- pre5ud6ed. 93e trial ,ourt announ,ed" be/ore an- o/ t3e 4i/e@s eviden,e 4as presented" t3at Ran-bod- ,an 6et a 5ob no4 ... men or 4omenR and t3at 3e 4ould not ,onsider an a4ard o/ alimon-. LLHer attorne- introdu,ed eviden,e o/ 3er p3-si,al ,ondition and livin6 eApenses" but t3e 5ud6e several times de,lared it 4as Ra 4aste o/ time.R arl- in t3e trial" 43en t3e 3usband o//ered to 4it3dra4 3is ,ross& ,omplaint i/ t3e 4i/e 4ould 4aive alimon-" t3e 5ud6e stated t3at 3er 4aiver 4ould be unne,essar- be,ause Rt3e Court 4ill 4aive it 3imsel/.R 93e 3usband rested 4it3out presentin6 eviden,e. 93is ,ourt revie4ed t3e 4i/e@s ,ase" in,ludin6 t3e /a,t t3at t3e parties 3ad been married man- -ears and t3at t3e 4i/e 4as be-ond middle a6e and 4it3out eAperien,e ot3er t3an as 3ouse4i/e and mot3er" and it 4as ,on,luded t3at t3e eviden,e 4ould 3ave supported an a4ard o/ alimon- and t3at t3e 4i/e 4as t3ere/ore pre5udi,ed b- t3e ,ourt@s re/usal to ,onsider 3er ,laim. ?n Ael Buth v. Ael Buth% '5 Cal.:pp.2d %3( ;1'1 =.2d 34<" t3e trial ,ourt re/used to ,onsider man- o/ t3e material alle6ations made b- ea,3 part- and at t3e outset limited t3e proo/ o/ ,ruelt- to t3e t4o or t3ree -ears immediatel- pre,edin6 separation" alt3ou63 t3e parties 3ad been married over 20 -ears. :lso" at one point in t3e trial" t3e 5ud6e ,alled t3e 4i/e to 3is ,3ambers and eApressed relu,tan,e to 6rant separate maintenan,e7 no attorne-s 4ere present at t3is ,on/eren,e and t3e a//idavits re6ardin6 t3e details o/ 43at took pla,e do not appear in t3e opinion. 93e trial ,ourt ultimatel- 6ave a divor,e to t3e 3usband on t3e basis o/ t3e 4i/e@s ,ruelt- but nevert3eless a4arded 3er t3ree&/ourt3s o/ t3e ,ommunit- propert-. ?n reversin6 t3e 5ud6ment" t3e appellate ,ourt eApressl- re/used to spe,ulate 43et3er or not t3e 5ud6e mi63t /182 3ave allo4ed 3is opposition to separate maintenan,e to ,olor 3is 5ud6ment7 3is remarks re6ardin6 separate maintenan,e 4ere re/erred to solel- in ,onne,tion 4it3 t3e 0uestion 43et3er or not t3e 43olesale eA,lusion o/ issues 3ad been pre5udi,ial error. :s in t3e Webber ,ase" t3ere 4as no su66estion o/ ,onsent to t3e 5ud6ment. In re Marria!e o0 Le6en, 113 Cal.(...3d 16,, 110 Cal.:.tr. 642 %Cal.(... 2 -ist. -ec 22, 1,80)

LL41

C: >ur. 3d >ud6es s '2" =art-@s statement o/ dis0uali/i,ation )2011*

Crounds to strike statement o/ dis0uali/i,ation7 LLalle6ations o/ /a,ts not pertinent or appropriate to t3e issues to be determined in t3e 3earin6 a,tin6 4it3out la4/ul 5urisdi,tion. =reventin6 a,,ess to eA,lusive /ederal 5urisdi,tion and remed-. :,tin6 ultra vires. :re t3e 6rounds /or strikin6 onl- appli,able 43en a,tual bias is alle6edO
%8) >ud6es M 14&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Crounds&&Dias or =re5udi,e&&!e/inition o/ Dias&& $u//i,ien,- o/ !e,laration o/ :,tual Dias. $in,e bias or pre5udi,e o/ a 5ud6e ma- /irst make its appearan,e onl- a/ter t3e

,ommen,ement o/ a le6al pro,eedin6" a liti6ant is entitled to ur6e t3e 6round o/ dis0uali/i,ation at t3at time" so lon6 as it is done at t3e earliest pra,ti,able opportunit- a/ter t3e dis,over- o/ /a,ts. +Dias is de/ined as a mental predeli,tion or pre5udi,e7 a leanin6 o/ t3e mind7 Za predisposition to de,ide a ,ause or an issue in a ,ertain 4a-" 43i,3 does not leave t3e mind per/e,tl- open to ,onvi,tion.@ Dias or pre5udi,e ,onsists o/ a Zmental attitude or disposition o/ a 5ud6e to4ard t3e part- to a liti6ation ....2@ ?/ t3e dis0uali/-in6 statement is le6all- su//i,ient in alle6in6 /a,ts ,onstitutin6 t3e bias and pre5udi,e o/ t3e 5ud6e and t3e 5ud6e /ails to /ile an ans4er t3ereto 4it3in /ive da-s as re0uired b- Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. )5*" su,3 /a,ts alle6ed in t3e statement must be taken as true and t3e 5ud6e be,omes dis0uali/ied automati,all-. Ho4ever" i/ t3e de,laration o/ a,tual bias is le6allinsu//i,ient as a 6round o/ dis0uali/i,ation" it ma- be i6nored or stri,ken /rom t3e /iles b- t3e trial 5ud6e. ?n order /or t3e 5ud6e to be dis0uali/ied under Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5" t3e pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a parti,ular part-. %,a, ,*) >ud6es M 1(&&!is0uali/i,ation&&Hearin6 and !etermination&& $trikin6 !e,larations o/ :,tual Dias. : motion /or t3e reassi6nment o/ a 3earin6 be/ore a trial 5ud6e" based on dis0uali/i,ation o/ a trial 5ud6e /or ,ause )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5*" and t3e papers supportin6 it ma- be stri,ken /rom t3e /iles b- t3e trial 5ud6e involved 43en all t3at t3e papers ,ontain are ,on,lusions7 re/eren,es to ,opious trans,ripts 4it3out ,itation to spe,i/i, eA,erpts7 LLalle6ations o/ /a,ts not pertinent or appropriate to t3e issues to be determined in t3e 3earin67 material not le6allindi,ative o/ bias or pre5udi,e" su,3 as 5udi,ial opinions eApressed in t3e dis,3ar6e o/ liti6ation and le6al rulin6s7 5udi,ial rea,tions based on a,tual observan,e and parti,ipation in le6al pro,eedin6s7 and re/eren,es to ,ir,umstan,es so in,onse0uential as to be no indi,ation 43atsoever o/ 3ostilit- and nonprobative o/ an- bias or pre5udi,e. #nder t3e /ore6oin6 prin,iple" t3e trial ,ourt did not err in strikin6 t3e de,larations o/ a,tual bias a6ainst 3im /iled b- t3e deponent" 43o 3ad re/used to ans4er numerous 0uestions at 3is deposition" and b- 3is attorne-" 43o 3ad advised t3e re/usal to ans4er some o/ t3e 0uestions" /or t3e purpose o/ dis0uali/-in6 t3e 5ud6e /rom an- /urt3er 3earin6 on t3e Code Civ. =ro,." M 1034" subd. )a*" motion o/ t3e proponent o/ t3e 0uestions /or an order imposin6 san,tions a6ainst t3e deponent and 3is attorne-" 43ere t3e de,larations 4ere a 5eremiad o/ 6litterin6 6eneralities" sub5e,tive interpretations" ,on,lusions and ,omplaints about le6al rulin6s and 5udi,ial responses to t3e eviden,e and did not 0uote a sin6le statement" verbatim" made b- t3e ,ourt. (*?t is undoubtedl- t3e la4 t3at sin,e bias or pre5udi,e o/ a 5ud6e ma- /irst make its appearan,e onl- a/ter t3e ,ommen,ement o/ a le6al pro,eedin6" a liti6ant is entitled to ur6e t3e 6round o/ dis0uali/i,ation at t3at time ) )chorr v. )uperior Court )19(0* 105 Cal.:pp.3d 5%(" 5'1 ; 1%4 Cal.Jptr. 4'(<*" so lon6 as it is done at t3e earliest pra,ti,able opportunit- a/ter t3e dis,over- o/ t3e /a,ts. ) /18,$ak "rove )chool Aist v. City #itle Ins. Co. )19%3* 21' Cal.:pp.2d %'(" '03 ; 32 Cal.Jptr. 2((<.* ?/ t3e dis0uali/-in6 statement is le6all- su//i,ient in alle6in6 /a,ts ,onstitutin6 t3e bias and pre5udi,e o/ t3e 5ud6e and t3e 5ud6e /ails to /ile an ans4er t3ereto 4it3in /ive da-s as re0uired b- Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5" such 'acts alle6ed in t3e statement must be taken as true and t3e 5ud6e be,omes dis0uali/ied automati,all-. ?n Paci'ic etc. Con'erence o' (nited Methodist Church v. )uperior Court )19'(* (2 Cal.:pp.3d '2" (% ; 14' Cal.Jptr. 44<" t3e ,ourt statedF +Dias is de/ined as a mental predeli,tion or pre5udi,e7 a leanin6 o/ t3e mind7 @a predisposition to de,ide a ,ause or an issue in a ,ertain 4a-" 43i,3 does not leave t3e mind per/e,tl- open to ,onvi,tion.@ ;Citation.< Dias or pre5udi,e ,onsists o/ a @mental attitude or disposition o/ t3e 5ud6e to4ards a part- to t3e liti6ation" ...@ ;Citation.< ?n order /or t3e 5ud6e to be dis0uali/ied under Code o/ Civil =ro,edure se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5" t3e pre5udi,e must be a6ainst a parti,ular part-.2

Ho4ever" i/ t3e de,laration o/ a,tual bias is le6all- insu//i,ient as a 6round o/ dis0uali/i,ation" it ma- be i6nored or stri,ken /rom t3e /iles b- t3e trial 5ud6e. ) People v. )weeney )19%0* 55 Cal.2d 2'" 35 ; 9 Cal.Jptr. '93" 35' =.2d 1049<.* ?n t3e ,ase o/ In re Morelli )19'0* 11 Cal.:pp.3d (19 ; 91 Cal.Jptr. '2<" t3e ,ourt undertook an eA3austive eAamination o/ t3e aut3orities 43i,3 arti,ulate t3e ,ir,umstan,es in 43i,3 t3e 5ud6e a,,used o/ a,tual bias is eA,used /rom /ollo4in6 t3e pro,edure pros,ribed b- se,tion 1'0" subdivision 5" ,allin6 /or a re/eren,e o/ t3e matter o/ 3is alle6ed dis0uali/i,ation to t3e presidin6 5ud6e /or determination. :/ter distillin6 t3e 3oldin6s o/ t3e various aut3orities" t3e Morelli ,ourt states )p. (43*F )9a*+: motion /or t3e reassi6nment o/ a 3earin6 be/ore a trial ,ourt" based on dis0uali/i,ation o/ a trial 5ud6e /or ,ause )Code Civ. =ro,." M 1'0" subd. 5*" and t3e papers supportin6 it ma- be stri,ken /rom t3e /iles b- t3e trial 5ud6e involved 43en all t3at said papers ,ontain areF ,on,lusions7 re/eren,es to ,opious trans,ripts 4it3out ,itation to spe,i/i, eA,erpts7 alle6ations o/ /a,ts not pertinent or appropriate to t3e issues to be determined in t3e 3earin67 material not le6allindi,ative o/ bias or pre5udi,e" su,3 as 5udi,ial opinions eApressed in t3e dis,3ar6e o/ liti6ation and le6al rulin6s7 5udi,ial rea,tions based on a,tual observan,e in parti,ipation in le6al pro,eedin6s7 and re/eren,es to ,ir,umstan,es so in,onse0uential as to be no indi,ation 43atsoever o/ 3ostilit- and nonprobative o/ an- bias or pre5udi,e.2 )10* Morelli /urt3er tea,3es t3at appellate revie4 o/ an unans4ered de,laration o/ pre5udi,e does not permit a revie4in6 ,ourt to take ,o6niIan,e o/ t3e anal-sis and eAplanations o/ t3e trial 5ud6e /1,0 t3at are ot3er4ise a part o/ t3e re,ord be,ause +... t3ese ,annot be taken into ,onsideration in determinin6 43et3er t3e movin6 papers spe,i/ied su//i,ient pertinent /a,t material to /rame an issue and 4arrant a 3earin6 be/ore anot3er 5ud6e. 93e- are t3e t-pe o/ t3in6 t3at su,3 anot3er 5ud6e 4ould ,onsider in resolvin6 t3e issue i/ it 4ere put to 3im.2 ) Id. at p. (45.* In re 7oc$s Media, Inc., 318 7.3d ,16, 22 Collier &an5r.Cas.2d 110, 43 &an5r.Ct.-ec. 100, &an5r. L. :e.. + 80,138, 04 Cal. -ail3 4.. Serv. 6,32, 2004 -ail3 Jo$rnal -.(.:. ,444 %,th Cir.%Cal.) ($! 02, 2004) .. ,31 ;20< Finall-" Fo,us points to t3e bankrupt,- 5ud6e@s administration o/ t3e pro,eedin6s as potential eviden,e o/ partialit-. :lt3ou63 t3e pro,eedin6s 4ere len6t3and t3e bankrupt,- 5ud6e ma- at times 3ave been stern" LLFo,us 3as ,ited not3in6 in t3e re,ord to su66est t3at t3e bankrupt,- 5ud6e 4as un4illin6 to 3ear and respond to Fo,us@ ,on,erns and ar6uments.

Loss o/ eviden,e re/usin6 to 3ear eviden,e /or due pro,ess Je/usin6 to 3ear motion /or ,onsolidation. violation o/ due pro,ess. #tiliIe Webber v. Webber W3en t3e state provides /or a pro,edure it must provide due pro,ess. ;$ills did not provide a /ull and /air 3earin6.

F-bel and $ills did a,ts o/ moral turpitude a6ainst 4itness !avid C3e-. D= %10%. look to t3e Cannons o/ t3e Code o/ >udi,ial t3i,s /or t3e eAa,t o//ense" /ilin6 /alse name ,onstitutes obstru,tion o/ 5usti,e.< and pre5ud6ment 14t3 :mend. =rote,tion /rom arbitrar- ,apri,ious a,tion.

:m.>ur. 2d Constitutional La4" 9-pes o/ $ubstantive !ue =ro,ess Claims7 ?n Ceneral $e,tion 91% Dad /ait3 ,ondu,t o/ t3e motion /or re,onsideration re/le,t a 43imsi,al disre6ard o/ a statutor- s,3eme. $e,tion 91' Dias and Dad /ait3 ?/ dire,t appeal or anot3er avenue o/ ,ollateral atta,k is ,reated b- state" it must ,on/orm to due pro,ess standards. =earson v. Borris C.:.( ):rk.* 1995 52 F.3d '40 Constitutional La4. us,a annotated under :mend P?8" ,ivil pro,edure !ue pro,ess ,lause is ,on,erned not onl- 4it3 a,tual bias o/ 5ud6es and 5urors" but also 4it3 appearan,e o/ 5usti,e. AAon Corp. v. HeinIe" C.:.9 ):laska* 1994" 32 F.3d 1399 #s,a annotated :mend P?8" pro,edural due pro,ess p.545 Cali/ornia Forms H/ =leadin6 :nd =ra,ti,e" #nder Constitutional La4. !ue pro,ess re0uire a neutral and deta,3ed de,isionnmaker in t3e /irst instan,e Con,rete =ipe U =rodu,ts o/ Cal. v. Constru,tion Laborers =ension 9rust /or $out3ern Cali/ornia 50( #.$. %02" %1' Ward v. Monroeville 490 #.$. 5'
25 :.L.J.3d 1331 -isC$ali0ication o0 H$d!e *eca$se o0 his or anotherAs holdin! or o8nin! stoc5 in cor.oration involved in liti!ation :. L. $,34artI. 93e /ollo4in6 statements illustrate t3e 4a- t3e ,ourts 3ave applied t3e above rule to parti,ular /a,tual situations. : 5ud6e o4nin6 oil ,ompan- sto,k 4as re0uired to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ in a suit brou63t a6ainst anot3er oil ,ompan-" 43ere t3e suit 4as brou63t to obtain a rulin6 upon t3e naked le6al 0uestion o/ possible s3are3older liabilit- /or t3e value o/ eAtra,tion /rom various oil lands" in,ludin6 lands o4ned b- t3e ,orporation in 43i,3 t3e 5ud6e o4ned sto,k" 3eld t3e ,ourt in Je Honolulu Consol. Hil Co. )191'" C:9 Cal* 243 F 34(" statin6 t3at it 4ould not be astute in makin6 ni,e distin,tions as to t3e 4ords R,on,erned in interestR 4it3in t3e /ederal dis0uali/i,ation statute 6enerallprovidin6 /or t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e Rin an- 4a- ,on,erned in interestR in an- suit pendin6 in 3is ,ourt. : 5ud6e@s re/usal to sit 4as a//irmed in adams v Minor 121 Cal 3'2" 53 = (15" 43ere an issue 4as raised as to t3e validit- o/ ,ertain bonds" in,ludin6 t3ose 3eld ba nonpart- bank in 43i,3 t3e 5ud6e o4ned sto,k" t3e ,ourt statin6 t3at RinterestR 4it3in t3e dis0uali/i,ation statute meant an- dire,t" ,ertain" pe,uniar- or propertinterest" 3o4ever small or tri/lin6. W3ere t3e 5ud6e 4as a mere R3olderR o/ ,orporate sto,k as trustee" 3is 5ud6ment in /avor o/ t3e ,orporate de/endant on t3e issue o/ liabilit- in a personal in5ur- ,ase 4as va,ated b- t3e ,ourt in 9atum v $out3ern =a,i/i, Co. )19%'* 250 Cal :pp 2d 40" 5( Cal Jptr 23(" 25 :LJ3d 1325" be,ause t3e statutor- dis0uali/i,ation /or interest 4as ,ast in absolute /orm b- providin6 t3at no 5usti,e or 5ud6e s3all sit or a,t in an-

a,tion or pro,eedin6 in 43i,3 3e is interested as a 3older or o4ner o/ an- ,apital sto,k o/ a ,orporation" t3e ,ourt statin6 t3at it 4as immaterial t3at neit3er t3e 5ud6e nor t3e parties 4ere a4are durin6 t3e trial t3at t3e ,orpus o/ t3e trust ,ontained sto,k o/ t3e ,orporate part-" and t3at t3e a,tual dan6er o/ 5udi,ial impartialit- 4as remote" sin,e t3e 5ud6e@s interest as trustee ,ould 3ardl- be a//e,ted substantiall- b- t3e out,ome o/ t3e ,ase. ?n >alleHo v S$.erior Co$rt o0 'a.a co$nt3 ) 1,26* 1,, Cal 408" 24, + 1084" 48 (L: 610" t3e ,ourt 3eld t3at a 5ud6e" as sto,k3older in a bank 3oldin6 an overdue deed o/ trust on t3e propert- sou63t to be ,ondemned" 4as dis0uali/ied /rom sittin6 in t3e ,ondemnation pro,eedin6" sin,e t3e bank 3ad a present proprietar- interest in andetermination as a ,reditor 43o 4ould be entitled to 3ave an- ,ondemnation a4ard applied to its ,laim. CUMUL(?I>E SU++LEME'? CasesD >ud6e 43o 3ad a,ted as liti6ation ,ounsel /or ,orporation /or 12 -ear period and 43o possessed several 3undred s3ares o/ its sto,k" a,0uired durin6 ,ourse o/ 3is asso,iation 4it3 ,orporation" 4as re0uired to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ /rom all /urt3er matters in ,ase 43ere ,orporation" alt3ou63 not a part-" 3ad /inan,ial interest in its out,ome. Cali/ornia v Nleppe )19''" !C Cal* 431 F $upp 1344

1%3 :LJ Fed 5'5 -isC$ali0ication o0 H$d!e $nder 28 U.S.C.(. I 422%*)%4), .rovidin!
0or disC$ali0ication 8here H$d!e has 0inancial or other interest in .roceedin! 1. 7inancial Interest I 8. 48nershi. o0 stoc5 ?n t3e /ollo4in6 ,ases 43ere a 5ud6e or a 5ud6e@s spouse 3eld sto,k in a ,orporate part-" t3e ,ourts determined t3at dis0uali/i,ation /or /inan,ial interest in a part4as re0uired under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4*. ?n >ames v. :,ands" ?n,." 199% WL 131503 )B.!. ?ll. 199%*" an a,tion assertin6 ,laims a6ainst a 3ost o/ ,orporations /rom t3e plainti//@s eAposure to asbestos or asbestos[,ontainin6 produ,ts" t3e distri,t 5ud6e de,lared t3at b- reason o/ 3is spouse@s o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in one o/ t3e named de/endants" 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* re0uired re,usal. Holdin6 t3at" /or purposes o/ re,usal under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4*" t3e term Rpart-R in,ludes ,lass members" )see M '" supra*" t3e Bint3 Cir,uit in ?n re Cement :ntitrust Liti6ation )M!L Bo. 29%*" %(( F.2d 129' )9t3 Cir. 19(2*" 5ud6ment a//@d" 459 #.$. 1191" 103 $. Ct. 11'3" '5 L. d. 2d 425 )19(3* and opinion supplemented on ot3er 6rounds" '09 F.2d 521 )9t3 Cir. 19(3*" denied a petition /or mandamus /iled bt3e plainti//s and ruled t3at t3e distri,t 5ud6e properl- re,used 3imsel/ /or /inan,ial interest based on 3is spouse@s sto,k o4ners3ip in several o/ t3e ,lass members in t3e pro,eedin6. 93e ,ourt a6reed 4it3 t3e distri,t 5ud6e@s anal-sis in re5e,tin6 t3e petitioners@ ar6ument t3at ,lass members are not parties" de,larin6 t3at t3e problem 4it3 t3e petitioners@ ar6ument 4as t3at" 43ere it ,ounts" ,lass members and parties are identi,al" ,lass members 4ere in,luded in t3e bene/its and burdens o/ a 5ud6ment on an e0ual basis 4it3 parties" and t3ere appeared to be no reason 43- a /inan,ial interest" R3o4ever small"R in a named part- to a liti6ation s3ould be 6rounds /or re,usal" but t3at t3e same interest in a ,lass member s3ould not be" sin,e neit3er t3e de6ree o/ ,on/li,t nor t3e appearan,e o/ impropriet- 4as altered b- a liti6ant@s ,lassi/i,ation as Rpart-R or R,lass member.R 93us" t3e ,ourt said" a/ter /ive -ears o/ liti6ation" a multimillion dollar la4suit o/ ma5or national

importan,e" 4it3 over 200"000 ,lass plainti//s" 3ad to 6rind to a 3alt over G29.'0" t3e lar6est amount t3at t3e 5ud6e@s spouse ,ould possibl- be enri,3ed b- a rulin6 /avorable to t3e petitioners" and a ne4 5ud6e 4as re0uired to ,ondu,t /urt3er pro,eedin6s. $ee B C Corp. v. ?ntel Corp." %54 F. $upp. 125%" 2 #.$.=.W.2d )DB:* 152( )B.!. Cal. 19('*" order va,ated on ot3er 6rounds" appeal dismissed" (35 F.2d 154% )9t3 Cir. 19((*" related re/eren,e" 10 #.$.=.W.2d )DB:* 11''" 19(9 WL %'434 )B.!. Cal. 19(9*" in 43i,3 t3e ,ourt" alt3ou63 /indin6 t3at t3e distri,t 5ud6e@s retrospe,tive dis0uali/i,ation 4as not re0uired under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* based on 3is o4ners3ip o/ an interest in an investment ,lub t3at 3eld sto,k in t3e de/endant ,orporation be,ause t3e distri,t 5ud6e 4as una4are o/ t3e /a,t t3at 3e 3eld an interest in t3e de/endant until 3e 4as so in/ormed b- t3e plainti//@s ,ounsel )see M %" supra*" observed t3at t3e investment ,lub did not /all 4it3in t3e statutoreA,eption to M 455)b*)4* /or a Rmutual or ,ommon investment /undR provided b- M 455)d*)4*)i*.;19< 93e eA,eption is inappli,able i/ t3e 5ud6e parti,ipates in t3e mana6ement o/ t3e /und" and" t3e ,ourt pointed out" under t3e >oint 8enture :6reement ,reatin6 t3e investment ,lub members3ip 4as limited to 24 members and de,isions to bu- or sell se,urities 4ere made b- vote o/ a ma5orit- o/ t3e votin6 po4er present at t3e meetin6. ?n Head4aters" ?n,. v. Dureau o/ Land Mana6ement" Med/ord !ist." %%5 F. $upp. ('3 )!. Hr. 19('*" a distri,t 5ud6e" a/ter dis,ussion 4it3 anot3er distri,t 5ud6e 43o ori6inall- denied t3e plainti//@s motion /or a temporar- restrainin6 order and preliminar- in5un,tion a/ter dis,losin6 to t3e parties t3at 3is spouse o4ned a minor interest in a ,orporate de/endant and pro,eedin6 4it3 t3eir ,onsent" stated t3at a /inan,ial interest" 3o4ever small" is 6enerall- 6rounds /or dis0uali/i,ation under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* and t3at su,3 6round /or dis0uali/i,ation is not 4aivable. #pon ,onsultation 4it3 t3e parties" t3e distri,t 5ud6e ,onsidered t3e matter de novo and denied t3e plainti//@s motion. I ,;a< JIn co6.an3 o8nin! or o.eratin! Hointl3 8ith .art3JJ$d!e held disC$ali0ied LL?n t3e /ollo4in6 ,ases" 5ud6es 4ere dis0uali/ied /or /inan,ial interest in a part- under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* 43ere t3e 5ud6e or 3is spouse o4ned s3ares o/ sto,k in t3e parent ,ompan- o/ a part- or a ,ompan- en6a6ed in 5oint operations 4it3 a part-. 93e distri,t 5ud6e re,used 3imsel/ under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* in Cat3erines v. Cop-tele" ?n,." %0( F. $upp. 1031 ) .!.B.K. 19(5*" a/ter learnin6 t3at one o/ t3e parties 4as a 43oll-[o4ned subsidiar- o/ a ,ompan- in 43i,3 t3e distri,t 5ud6e o4ned sto,k. $ee Ne- =3arma,euti,als" ?n,. v. M-lan Laboratories ?n,." 24 F. $upp. 2d 4(0 )W.!. =a. 199(*" in 43i,3 t3e distri,t 5ud6e" alt3ou63 /indin6 dis0uali/i,ation based on 3is o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in t3e parent ,ompan- o/ t3e plainti// unne,essar- under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)/* a/ter 3e divested 3imsel/ o/ t3e sto,k" determined t3at" 43ile t3e /inan,ial interest at issue 4as not" stri,tl- speakin6" in Ra part- to t3e pro,eedin6"R it 4as su//i,ientl- ,lose t3at it 4as 6overned b- t3e mandator- re,usal provisions o/ M 455)b*)4*.;20< Hn learnin6 t3at 3is spouse o4ned sto,k in a ,orporation t3at entered into a business ,ombination 4it3 t3e de/endant" t3e distri,t 5ud6e in Dro4n v. Durlin6ton Bort3ern J.J. Co." 199% WL 1'2292 )B.!. ?ll. 199%*" 3eld t3at dis0uali/i,ation 4as re0uired under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* and va,ated a prior order approvin6 t3e parties@ /inal pretrial order and a prior order dealin6 4it3 ot3er aspe,ts o/ read-in6 t3e ,ase /or an anti,ipated trial. 93e distri,t ,ourt in $tate o/ Cal. v. Nleppe" 431 F. $upp. 1344 )C.!. Cal. 19''*" an a,tion involvin6 t3e utiliIation o/ oil pipelines and tankerin6 o/ oil in a parti,ular area" 3eld t3at t3e trial 5ud6e 3ad a si6ni/i,ant /inan,ial interest in t3e out,ome o/ t3e liti6ation" even t3ou63 remote and indire,t" re0uirin6 t3e 5ud6e@s dis0uali/i,ation under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4*" )d*)4* based on o4ners3ip o/ some

/inan,ial interest in a part-" R3o4ever small.R :lt3ou63 t3e 5ud6e@s interest ,onsisted o/ sto,k o4ners3ip in an oil ,ompan- t3at 4as not a part- to t3e pro,eedin6s" t3at ,ompan- 3ad a partners3ip interest" overrides" and a lease interest in t3e area at issue 4it3 a part- de/endant. 93e ,ourt noted t3at t3e nonpart- oil ,ompan- in 43i,3 t3e 5ud6e o4ned sto,k 4ould 3ave been /inan,iall- a//e,ted b- t3e out,ome o/ t3e liti6ation. 93e ,ourt establis3ed t3at t3e 5ud6e@s /inan,ial interest eAisted b- reason o/ t3e 5ud6e@s o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in a ,orporation 43ose interest mi63t 3ave been indire,tl- and remotel- a//e,ted b- t3e out,ome o/ t3e instant liti6ation. I ,;*< JIn co6.an3 o8nin! or o.eratin! Hointl3 8ith .art3JJ$d!e held not disC$ali0ied 93e 5ud6es in t3e /ollo4in6 ,ases determined t3at dis0uali/i,ation /or /inan,ial interest in a part- under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* 4as not re0uired 43ere sto,k 3eld b- t3e 5ud6e or t3e 5ud6e@s spouse in a ,ompan- o4nin6 or operatin6 5ointl- 4it3 a ,orporate part- did not ,reate a dire,t /inan,ial interest in t3e ,orporate part- or t3e sub5e,t matter in ,ontrovers-. 93e ,ourt in #nion =lanters Dank v. L U > !evelopment Co." ?n,." 115 F.3d 3'(" 3' Fed. J. $erv. 3d )LC=* 1235" 199' F ! :pp. 1%9= )%t3 Cir. 199'*" re3@6 denied" )>ul11" 199'*" /ound t3at eviden,e t3at t3e distri,t 5ud6e@s spouse 3ad previousl- o4ned sto,k in a bank t3at a,0uired one o/ t3e parties to t3e instant suit 4as not su//i,ient" 4it3out more" to establis3 t3at t3e 5ud6e or 3is spouse 3ad an- dire,t /inan,ial interest in one o/ t3e parties t3at mi63t re0uire t3e 5ud6e@s dis0uali/i,ation under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* in t3e bank@s suit on a promissornote. W3en t3e plainti// re0uested dis0uali/i,ation o/ a trial 5ud6e" t3e distri,t ,ourt in Mavis v. Commer,ial Carriers" ?n,." 40( F. $upp. 55 )C.!. Cal. 19'5*" 3eld t3at a 5ud6e@s o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in an oil ,ompan- did not re0uire dis0uali/i,ation /rom pro,eedin6s t3at mi63t 3ave involved a subsidiar-" t4i,e removed" o/ a ,orporation t3at 3ad done business 4it3 t3e oil ,ompan-. 93e 5ud6e o4ned sto,k in an oil ,ompant3at 3ad en6a6ed in 5oint ventures 4it3" and sold 6as to" anot3er ,orporation" 43i,3 43oll- o4ned a ,orporation t3at in turn 43oll- o4ned t3e de/endant ,orporation. 93e ,ourt stated t3at su,3 sto,k o4ners3ip did not ,onstitute an- /inan,ial interest in t3e sub5e,t matter in ,ontrovers- or in a part- to t3e pro,eedin6 4it3in t3e meanin6 o/ 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4*. Furt3ermore" t3e ,ourt noted" t3e pro,eedin6 ,ould not 3ave 3ad an- possible e//e,t on t3e 5ud6e@s sto,k in t3e oil ,ompan- or its value" sin,e t3e ,ommer,ial ventures in 6as sales" drillin6" and eAploration 4ere entirelunrelated to an- issue o/ an- kind involved in t3e liti6ation. I 10;a< 48nershi. o0 .ro.rietar3 interest in .art3JJ$d!e held disC$ali0ied ;Cumulative $upplement< #nder 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)d*)4*)iii*" 43i,3 de/ines t3e term R/inan,ial interestR as used in M 455)b*)4*" t3e proprietar- interest o/ a poli,-3older in a mutual insuran,e ,ompan-" or o/ a depositor in a mutual savin6s asso,iation" or a similar proprietar- interest" is a R/inan,ial interestR in t3e or6aniIation onl- i/ t3e out,ome o/ t3e pro,eedin6 ,ould substantiall- a//e,t t3e value o/ t3e interest. ?t 3as been 3eld t3at a 5ud6e" 43o o4ned an insuran,e poli,- issued b- a part-" 4as dis0uali/ied under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* /or /inan,ial interest in a part- 43ere t3e out,ome o/ t3e ,ase ,ould 3ave substantiall- a//e,ted t3e value o/ t3e 5ud6e@s interest in t3e part-. 93e distri,t 5ud6e in Hartman v. $tate Farm Mut. :uto. ?ns. Co." (1' F. $upp. 15%% )$.!. Fla. 1993*" related re/eren,e" '' F.3d 49% )11t3 Cir. 199%*" re,used 3imsel/ under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4* /rom a pro,eedin6 brou63t b- an insuran,e a6ent a6ainst insuran,e ,ompaniesQseekin6 de,laration t3at ,ertain ,3an6es in t3e ,ompanies@ poli,ies and pro,edures 4ere unla4/ulQbased on 3is proprietar- interest in one o/ t3e de/endants as a poli,-3older. Botin6 a provision o/ M 455" 43i,3 states t3at t3e

proprietar- interest o/ a poli,-3older in a mutual insuran,e ,ompan- is a R/inan,ial interestR in t3e or6aniIation onl- i/ t3e out,ome o/ t3e pro,eedin6 ,ould substantiall- a//e,t t3e value o/ t3e interest" t3e 5ud6e eAplained t3at t3e plainti// sou63t a de,laration as to insuran,e ,ompan- pra,ti,es t3at ,ould 3ave substantial e,onomi, e//e,ts on t3e de/endant insuran,e ,ompanies. ?t appeared" t3e distri,t 5ud6e ,on,luded" t3at t3e out,ome o/ t3e present a,tion ,ould substantiall- a//e,t t3e value o/ 3is interest in one o/ t3e de/endants and t3at it 4as ne,essar- to re,use 3imsel/ in t3e interests o/ 5usti,e. CUMUL(?I>E SU++LEME'? CasesD >ud6e@s e0uit- interest in part- 6ave rise to appearan,e o/ partialit- re0uirin6 dis0uali/i,ation" alt3ou63 5ud6e did not kno4 o/ 3is /inan,ial interest in part- at time o/ trial" 43ere 3is presidin6 role 4as not merel- te,3ni,al 6iven t3at 3e presided over ben,3 trial and rendered de,ision on t3e merits" and a reasonable person kno4in6 pertinent /a,ts 4ould 3ave kno4n o/ dis0uali/-in6 /inan,ial interest. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)a*" )b*)4*. C3ase Man3attan Dank v. ://iliated FM ?ns. Co." 343 F.3d 120 )2d Cir. 2003*. ?$rner v. (6erican &ar (ssAn, 401 7.S$... 421 %'.-.?eE. 'ov 02, 1,12) ;32< J$d!es 221 20

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k50 k. Je/usal b- 5ud6e to a,t. Most Cited Cases ?n ,ivil a,tions 43ere t3e trial 5ud6e to 43i,3 t3e ,ase 3appens to be assi6ned is also a de/endant in t3e same a,tion" 5ud6e must dis0uali/- 3imsel/. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455. ;33< J$d!es 221 3,

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k39 k. Bature and e//e,t in 6eneral. Most Cited Cases W3ere all 5ud6es are dis0uali/ied b- reason o/ bein6 de/endants in t3e a,tion" none are dis0uali/ied. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455. ;34< J$d!es 221 3,

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k39 k. Bature and e//e,t in 6eneral. Most Cited Cases ?/ dis0uali/i,ation o/ 5ud6e operates so as to bar 5usti,e to t3e parties and no ot3er tribunal is available" t3e dis0uali/ied 5ud6e or 5ud6es ma- b- ne,essit- pro,eed to 5ud6ment. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455. ;32<;33<;34< Wit3 respe,t to dis0uali/i,ation in ,ivil a,tions 43ere t3e trial 5ud6e to 43i,3 t3e ,ase 3appens to be assi6ned is also a de/endant in t3e same a,tion" 2( #.$.C.:. s 455 4ould re0uire t3at t3e 5ud6e dis0uali/- 3imsel/. 93is Court notes" 3o4ever" t3at t3ere is a maAim o/ la4 to t3e e//e,t t3at 43ere all are dis0uali/ied" none are dis0uali/ied. vans v. Core" 253 #.$. 245" 40 $.Ct. 550" %4

L. d. ((' )1920*. 93e t3eor- supportin6 t3is maAim is t3at i/ dis0uali/i,ation operates so as to bar 5usti,e to t3e parties and no ot3er tribunal is available" t3e dis0uali/ied 5ud6e or 5ud6es ma- b- ne,essit- pro,eed to 5ud6ment. 4( C.>.$. >ud6es s '4. :lt3ou63 t3is maAim 4ould allo4 t3e $upreme Court to pro,eed 43ere all or a 0uorum o/ t3e >usti,es 3ave been sued" it 4ould seemin6l- not allo4 a !istri,t Court >ud6e to pro,eed i/ ot3er 5ud6es are available b- substitution. Drinkle- v. Hassi6" (3 F.2d 351 )C.:.10" 193%*. ;35< ?t is possible t3at la4suits similar to t3e above 4ill ,ontinue to be /iled. ?n an- ,ase 43ere t3e ,entral t3eme o/ t3e ,omplaint is t3e assertion o/ t3e ri63t to 3ave unli,ensed la- ,ounsel to represent a part-" t3e >ud6e on 43ose do,ket t3e ,ase /alls s3ould be /ree to dismiss t3e same sua sponte" even t3ou63 3e is a named part-. : ,laim o/ t3e ri63t to unli,ensed ,ounsel 3as been /ore,losed b- t3is opinion. ?/ t3is opinion is ultimatel- a//irmed on appeal" t3e makin6 o/ su,3 ,laim in t3e /uture 4ould be spe,ious and a >ud6e" even i/ a part-&de/endant" s3ould not dis0uali/- 3imsel/. l- 8alle- Mines" ?n,." et al. v. Lee" 3(5 F.2d 1(( )C.:.9" 19%'*. 93is 4ill prevent useless and time ,onsumin6 reassi6nment o/ a ,ase in t3is situation. 2' :.L.J.%t3 403 )Hri6inall- publis3ed in 200'* Constr$ction and (..lication o0 :$le o0 'ecessit3 in J$dicial (ctions, +rovidin! that a J$d!e Is 'ot -isC$ali0ied to ?r3 a Case &eca$se o0 +ersonal Interest I0 Case Cannot &e #eard 4ther8ise Nurtis :. Nemper" >.!. #nder t3e Jule o/ Be,essit-" a 5ud6e 43o is dis0uali/ied to sit in a ,ase manevert3eless 3ear and de,ide t3e matter i/ t3ere is no ot3er 5ud6e available to t3e parties. For eAample" in ?6na,io v. >ud6es o/ #.$. Court o/ :ppeals /or Bint3 Cir,uit" 453 F.3d 11%0" 2' :.L.J.%t3 %45 )9t3 Cir. 200%*" an individual made an apparent attempt to avoid 3is veAatious liti6ant status in Cali/ornia state ,ourts b/ilin6 suit in a /ederal distri,t ,ourt and namin6 all t3e members o/ t3e Bint3 Cir,uit as parties. ?t 4as t3us impossible /or t3e ,ourt to name a t3ree&member panel o/ 5ud6es 43o 4ere not a part- to t3e suit. Holdin6 t3at t3e Jule o/ Be,essit- applied 43en a liti6ant indis,riminatel- sues all 5ud6es o/ t3e ,ourt" t3e Bint3 Cir,uit /ound t3at re,usal 4as not re0uired in t3e present ,ase. 93is annotation ,olle,ts and anal-Ies t3e ,ases ,onstruin6 or appl-in6 t3e Jule o/ Be,essit- in 5udi,ial a,tions. //I 6. +ension or other 0rin!e *ene0its 93e ,ourts in t3e /ollo4in6 ,ases involvin6 5udi,ial pensions or ot3er /rin6e bene/its ,onsidered t3e propriet- o/ invokin6 t3e Jule o/ Be,essit- to 3ear and determine t3e matter even t3ou63 a 5ud6e or members o/ t3e ,ourt 4ere dis0uali/ied based on /inan,ial interest in t3e matter. $ee :etna Li/e ?ns. Co. v. Lavoie" 4'5 #.$. (13" 10% $. Ct. 15(0" (9 L. d. 2d (23 )19(%*" in 43i,3 t3e #nited $tates $upreme CourtF )1* /ound an insu//i,ient basis /or re0uirin6 re,usal under t3e !ue =ro,ess Clause o/ t3e #nited $tates Constitution 43ere t3e de/endant insuran,e ,ompan- ,ontended 5usti,es o/ t3e :labama $upreme Court 3ad a dis0uali/-in6 interest in t3e present ,aseQan a,tion b- t3e de/endant@s insureds assertin6 a ,laim /or bad /ait3 re/usal to pa- a valid 3ealt3 insuran,e ,laimQbased on /ailure to 4it3dra4 /rom a ,lass a,tion brou63t b- a 5usti,e o/ t3e ,ourt on be3al/ o/ all state emplo-ees a6ainst a di//erent insurer 43i,3 provided 3ealt3 insuran,e bene/its /or state emplo-ees7 and )2* observed t3at a,,eptin6 t3e de/endant@s eApansive ,ontentions mi63t re0uire dis0uali/i,ation o/ ever- 5ud6e in t3e state and"

i/ so" t3en it 4as possible t3at under t3e Jule o/ Be,essit-" none o/ t3e 5ud6es or 5usti,es 4ould be dis0uali/ied. ?n Hudson v. >o3nstone" %%0 =.2d 11(0 ):laska 19(3*" an :laska superior ,ourt 5ud6e ,3allen6ed t3e ,onstitutionalit-" on e0ual prote,tion 6rounds" o/ a statute re0uirin6 ea,3 5usti,e or 5ud6e ,ommen,in6 a ne4 term a/ter a spe,i/ied date to ,ontribute a per,enta6e o/ 3is or 3er salar- to t3e 5udi,ial retirement s-stem" and t3e :laska $upreme Court invoked t3e Jule o/ Be,essit- despite /indin6 t3at resolution o/ t3e matter 4as" indire,tl- at least" o/ /inan,ial interest to t3e members o/ t3e ,ourt. 93e ,ourt pointed out t3at i/ t3e plainti// s3ould su,,eed 4it3 3is ,laim t3at t3e statute 4as un,onstitutional" it 4as ,on,eivable t3at t3e state le6islature mi63t ena,t a statute re0uirin6 5usti,es and 5ud6es presentl- on t3e ben,3 to ,ontribute to t3e retirement s-stem upon 6ainin6 approval at t3eir neAt retention ele,tion. 93e present ,ase 4as a proper one in 43i,3 to invoke t3e Jule" t3e ,ourt de,lared" be,ause to 3old ot3er4ise 4ould result in a denial o/ a liti6ant@s ,onstitutional ri63t to 3ave a 0uestion ad5udi,ated. ?n ?n re Marria6e o/ :lar,on" 149 Cal. :pp. 3d 544" 19% Cal. Jptr. ((' )4t3 !ist. 19(3*" a Cali/ornia ,ourt o/ appeal ,on,luded t3at t3e Jule o/ Be,essit- allo4ed it to 3ear and ad5udi,ate an appeal /rom a trial ,ourt 5ud6ment de,larin6 provisions o/ t3e state >ud6es@ Jetirement La4 inappli,able to t3e interests o/ a divor,ed Bint3 Cir,uit Court o/ :ppeals 5usti,e" 43o previousl- served as a Cali/ornia trial and appellate ,ourt 5ud6e" and t3e interests o/ t3e 5usti,e@s /ormer spouse in 3is retirement allo4an,es. Bot4it3standin6 t3e t3eoreti,al possibilities t3at an- o/ t3e 5usti,es o/ t3e ,ourt mi63t be in t3e position o/ t3e 5usti,e involved in t3e present ,ase" t3e ,ourt noted t3at ot3er Cali/ornia 5ud6es also 3ad a possible interest. 93e !ela4are $upreme Court in Crosse v. DCD$!" ?n,." (3% :.2d 492 )!el. 2003*" an a,tion /or brea,3 o/ /idu,iar- dut- a6ainst a nonpro/it 3ealt3 insurer" invoked t3e Jule o/ Be,essit- to enable members o/ t3e ,ourt to 3ear t3e ,ase 4it3out re6ard to an- dis0uali/i,ations t3at mi63t eAist due to t3e /a,t t3at t3eir 3ealt3 insuran,e 4as provided b- t3e de/endant 3ealt3 insurer. 93e ?ndiana $upreme Court in Doard o/ 9rustees o/ =ubli, mplo-ees@ Jetirement Fund v. Hill" 4'2 B. .2d 204 )?nd. 19(5*" on appeal /rom a trial ,ourt@s rulin6 t3at amendments to a statute ,reatin6 t3e >ud6es@ Jetirement Fund 43i,3 rede/ined salar- as a /a,tor in determinin6 retirement bene/its 4ere ine//e,tive and un,onstitutional" 3eld t3at t3e members o/ t3e ,ourt 4ere dut- bound to 3ear t3e ,ase under t3e Jule o/ Be,essit-. ven t3ou63 t3e 5usti,es o/ t3e ,ourt 4ere parti,ipants in t3e >ud6es@ Jetirement Fund and 3ad interests and eApe,tations in t3e sub5e,t matter o/ t3e appeal t3at 4ere identi,al to t3ose o/ t3e appellees" t3e ,ourt observed t3at t3ere 4as no ot3er appropriate /orum to de,ide t3e matter. $ee :ttorne- Ceneral o/ Mar-land v. Waldron" 2(9 Md. %(3" 42% :.2d 929" 1' :.L.J.4t3 '94 )19(1*" an appeal involvin6 t3e ,onstitutionalit- o/ a state statute pro3ibitin6 a 5ud6e 43o retires and a,,epts a pension provided b- a statutor- s,3eme /rom t3erea/ter en6a6in6 in t3e pra,ti,e o/ la4 /or ,ompensation" in 43i,3 t3e Mar-land Court o/ :ppeals observed t3at ea,3 member o/ t3e ,ourt and" indeed" ever5ud6e in t3e state 3ad at least a remote interest in t3e out,ome o/ t3e ,ase t3at normall- mi63t merit re,usal but de,laredQ4it3out eApressl- re/errin6 to t3e Jule o/ Be,essit-Qt3at t3e ,ollateral interests o/ its members nonet3eless did not dis0uali/t3em /rom parti,ipatin6 in t3e ,ourt@s de,ision on t3e merits o/ t3e dispute sin,e dis0uali/i,ation o/ all t3e 5ud6es 4ould destro- t3e onl- tribunal in 43i,3 relie/ bappeal ma- be sou63t.

D. Motion To Disqualify Judge, Cal. Prac. Guide Fed. Civ. Pro. Before Trial Ch. 1 !D

LL)2* ;1%F1((.4< K7inancial interestL in .art3Ms a00airsD +Finan,ial interest2 means dire,t o4ners3ip o/ a le6al or e0uitable interest" 3o4ever small" or a relations3ip as

a dire,tor" advisor or ot3er a,tive parti,ipant in t3e a//airs o/ a part-. ;2( #$C M 455)d*)4*7 see "uardian Pipeline% L.L.C. v. -.1.81 Acres o' Land )'t3 Cir. 200(* 525 F3d 554" 55'Q+interest2 means an asset 43ose value depends on t3e out,ome" or LLsome ot3er ,on,rete /inan,ial e//e,t )su,3 as 3o4 mu,3 propert- taA a 5ud6e pa-s*7 see also Aelta Air Lines% Inc. v. )asser )11t3 Cir. 199'* 12' F3d 129%" 129'Q/re0uent /l-er a,,ount is not a +/inan,ial interest2 in airline< )a* ;1%F1((.5< Si=e o0 interest not deter6inativeD +?/ a 5ud6e 3as an o4ners3ip interest in a part- or in t3e sub5e,t matter in ,ontrovers-" it matters not at all 43et3er t3e interest is a lar6e or in/initesimall- small amount.2 ;In re &irginia Elec. < Power Co. )4t3 Cir. 19'%* 539 F2d 35'" 3%(7 In re City o' *ouston )5t3 Cir. 19(4* '45 F2d 925" 92(< LL93e p3rase +3o4ever small2 3as been aut3oritativel- ,onstrued as meant literall-. ;Aavis v. Kero: )9t3 Cir. 19('* (11 F2d 1293" 1295< Z ;1%F1((.%< >ud6e 4as re0uired to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ /rom a ,ase involvin6 PeroA be,ause 3e o4ned a G500 PeroA 4arrant /rom 43i,3 3e re,eived dividends o/ approAimatel- G30 a -ear. ;Aavis v. Kero:% supra" (11 F2d at 1295< Z ;1%F1((.%a< W3ere a 5ud6e1s spouse or minor ,3ild residin6 in 3er 3ouse3old is a member o/ a putative ,lass in a pendin6 ,lass a,tion" t3e 5ud6e 3as a +/inan,ial interest2 in t3e ,ase mandatin6 re,usal under M 455)b*)4*. ?t is immaterial t3at t3e ,lass a,tion 3as not -et been ,erti/ied and re,over- is un,ertain ... be,ause an/inan,ial interest" +3o4ever small"2 re0uires re,usal. ;#ra!onte v. Chrysler Corp. )5t3 Cir. 199(* 13% F3d 1025" 1030< 1A Fed. Proc. Forms 1:991 Federal =ro,edural Forms Database updated July 2011 C3apter 1. :,tions in !istri,t Court P?. >ud6es :. =ro,edural Cuide $ummar- Correlation 9able Je/eren,es 1:991. Disqualification of ud!e or ot"er udicial officer

estMs Ge3 '$6*er -i!est estMs Ge3 '$6*er -i!est, 7ederal Civil +roced$re 2114%4) estMs Ge3 '$6*er -i!est, J$d!es 3, to 26 93e !ue =ro,ess Clause demarks onl- t3e outer boundaries o/ 5udi,ial dis0uali/i,ations" and Con6ress and t3e states remain /ree to impose more ri6orous standards /or 5udi,ial dis0uali/i,ation t3an t3ose mandated as a matter o/ due pro,ess.0.50 W3enever a part- in a pro,eedin6 in #nited $tates !istri,t Court /iles a timel- and su//i,ient a//idavit t3at t3e 5ud6e be/ore 43om t3e matter is pendin6 3as a personal bias a6ainst t3e part- or in /avor o/ an adverse part-" t3e 5ud6e must pro,eed no /urt3er in t3e pro,eedin6" and anot3er 5ud6e must be assi6ned to 3ear it.1 :n a//idavit alle6in6 bias or pre5udi,e on t3e part o/ a 5ud6e must state t3e /a,ts and reasons /or t3e belie/ t3at su,3 bias or pre5udi,e eAists.2 93e a//idavit must be /iled not less t3an 10 da-s be/ore t3e be6innin6 o/ t3e session at 43i,3 t3e pro,eedin6 is to be 3eard" unless 6ood ,ause is s3o4n /or /ailure to /ile 4it3in su,3 time" and it is to be a,,ompanied b- a ,erti/i,ate o/ ,ounsel o/ re,ord statin6 t3at it is made in 6ood /ait3. : part- ma- /ile onl- one su,3 a//idavit in an- ,ase.3

Co66entD 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)a* re0uires t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ an- 5usti,e" 5ud6e" or ma6istrate o/ t3e #nited $tates in an- pro,eedin6 in 43i,3 su,3 a person1s impartialit- mi63t reasonabl- be 0uestioned" and 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)1* re0uires su,3 a person1s dis0uali/i,ation in ,ir,umstan,es 43ere su,3 a person 3as a personal bias or pre5udi,e ,on,ernin6 a part- or personal kno4led6e o/ disputed evidentiar/a,ts ,on,ernin6 t3e pro,eedin6.4 ven t3ou63 t3e +eAtra5udi,ial sour,e2 do,trine arose under 2( #.$.C.:. M 144 )and its prede,essor* providin6 /or t3e dis0uali/i,ation o/ a /ederal distri,t 5ud6e on a part-1s /ilin6 o/ a timel- and su//i,ient a//idavit t3at t3e 5ud6e 3as a personal bias or pre5udi,e" t3e eAtra5udi,ial sour,e do,trine or /a,tor applies under 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)a*. ?n vie4 o/ t3e pe5orative ,onnotation o/ t3e 4ords +bias2 or +pre5udi,e2 as t3e- are used in MM 144 and 455)b*)1* as a /avorable or un/avorable disposition t3at is some3o4 4ron6/ul or inappropriate" be,ause it is undeserved" rests on kno4led6e t3at t3e sub5e,t ou63t not to possess" or is eA,essive in de6ree t3e eAtra5udi,ial sour,e do,trine is one appli,ation o/ t3is pe5orativeness re0uirement" 43ile t3e +ob5e,tive appearan,e2 prin,iple o/ M 455)a* makes irrelevant t3e sub5e,tive limitation o/ M 455)b*)1* so t3at under M 455)a*" a 5ud6e does not 3ave to be sub5e,tivel- biased or pre5udi,ed so lon6 as t3e 5ud6e appears to be. $o not3in6 in M 455)a* eliminates t3e lon6&standin6 M 455)b*)1* limitation t3at personal bias or pre5udi,e does not ,onsist o/ a disposition t3at /ails to satis/- t3e eAtra5udi,ial sour,e do,trine" 43ere" /or eAample" t3e ob5e,tive appearan,e o/ an adverse disposition attributable to in/ormation a,0uired in a prior trial is not an ob5e,tive appearan,e o/ personal bias or pre5udi,e and 3en,e not an ob5e,tive appearan,e o/ improper partialit-.5 ?n order to be dis0uali/-in6" t3e 5ud6e1s alle6ed bias or pre5udi,e must stem /rom an eAtra5udi,ial sour,e and result in an opinion on t3e merits on some basis ot3er t3an 43at t3e 5ud6e learned /rom parti,ipation in t3e ,ase.% ?n de,idin6 43et3er probabilit- o/ a,tual bias on part o/ 5ud6e is too 3i63 to be ,onstitutionalltolerable" ,ourt1s in0uir- is ob5e,tive one" t3at asks not 43et3er 5ud6e is a,tuall-" sub5e,tivel- biased" but 43et3er avera6e 5ud6e in 5ud6e1s position is likel- to be neutral" or 43et3er t3ere is un,onstitutional potential /or bias.%.50 #nder ,ertain ,ir,umstan,es" 5ud6es and ot3er 5udi,ial o//i,ers are re0uired to dis0uali/- t3emselves /rom a pro,eedin6.' 0. 50 1 2
Caperton v. :.9. Masse- Coal Co." ?n,." 129 $. Ct. 2252" 1'3 L. d. 2d 120( )2009*

2( #.$.C.:. M 144

://idavit ma- be made on in/ormation and belie/ i/ /a,ts are set /ort3 as basis o/ belie/. Der6er v. #.$." 255 #.$. 22" 41 $. Ct. 230" %5 L. d. 4(1 )1921*)under prede,essor to 2( #.$.C.:. M 144*.

2( #.$.C.:. M 144 (.L.:. Li*rar3 9imeliness o/ a//idavit o/ dis0uali/i,ation o/ trial 5ud6e under 2( #.$.C.:. se,. 144" 141 :.L.J. Fed. 311 Condu,t or bias o/ la4 ,lerk or ot3er 5udi,ial support personnel as 4arrantin6 re,usal o/ /ederal 5ud6e or ma6istrate" %5 :.L.J. Fed. ''5 Form and re0uirements o/ ,erti/i,ate and a//idavit o/ dis0uali/i,ation o/ trial 5ud6e under 2( #.$.C.:. se,. 144" 23 :.L.J. Fed. %3' !is0uali/i,ation o/ /ederal 5ud6e" under 2( #$C se,. 144" /or a,ts and ,ondu,t o,,urrin6 in ,ourtroom durin6 trial or in rulin6 upon issues or 0uestions involved" 2 :.L.J. Fed. 91'

?reatises and +ractice (ids Federal =ro,edure" L. d. MM 20F33% to 20F3%0

4 5 % %. 50 '

2( #.$.C.:. 455)a*" )b*.

Litek- v. #.$." 510 #.$. 540" 114 $. Ct. 114'" 12' L. d. 2d 4'4 )1994*

#.$. v. Crinnell Corp." 3(4 #.$. 5%3" (% $. Ct. 1%9(" 1% L. d. 2d ''( )19%%*

Caperton v. :.9. Masse- Coal Co." ?n,." 129 $. Ct. 2252" 1'3 L. d. 2d 120( )2009*

2( #.$.C.:. M 455 :s to su,3 ,ir,umstan,es" see t3e ,3e,klist in M 1F993 ?reatises and +ractice (ids Federal =ro,edure" L. d. MM 20F39 to 20F142

In re U.S., 212 7.3d 301 %1th Cir.% is.),J$l 10, 200,) U.S. v. Sellers, 266 7.2d 884, 2 7ed. :. Evid. Serv. 840, 881, %4th Cir.%S.C.) 'ov 30, 1,11) We 3old t3at t3e trial ,ourt did not abuse its dis,retion. +!is0uali/i,ation /or la,k o/ dis,retion must 3ave a reasonable basis"2 )itali,s are t3ose o/ t3e House*" and 4e ,an /ind on t3is re,ord no +reasonable /a,tual basis /or doubtin6 t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-.2 H.J. Jep. Bo. 93&1453" reprinted at %355. Bo reason appears 43- o4nin6 sto,k in a 3oldin6 ,ompan- o4nin6 a bank t3at is robbed 4ould lead to an- reasonable appre3ension t3at t3e sto,k3older 5ud6e 4ould be partial. LLBeit3er t3e bank nor its parent ,ompan- are parties to t3e ,ase";FB2< and 4e /ind t3at an- interest t3e 5ud6e mi63t possibl- 3ave in t3e ,ase is so remote as to be /or all pra,ti,al purposes non& eAistent. Javi,3" supra. 93e business duties o/ 3is brot3er s3ould like4ise ,ause no + .reasonable /ear1 t3at t3e 5ud6e 4ill not be impartial.2 H.J.Jep. Bo. 93&1453" supra" reported at %355.

LLFB2. Were t3edis0uali/i,ation.

parties"

o/

,ourse"

455)b*)4*

4ould

re0uire

Gidder, +ea*od3 " Co., Inc. v. MaE$s Ener!3 Cor.., ,22 7.2d 226, 7ed. Sec. L. :e.. + ,2,111 %2nd Cir.%'.@.) 7e* 06, 1,,1)

Holdin6 ,ompan- as part- re0uires dis0uali/i,ation $to,k3older in $3are3older in 3oldin6 ,ompan- 43i,3 is a part-

H4n sto,k in 3oldin6 dis0uali/i,ation

,ompan-

;43i,3

is<

part-

re0uire

re,usal

From 25 alr 3d 1331 dis0 o/ 5ud6e be,ause o/ 3is 3oldin6 or o4nin6 sto,k in ,orp. involved in liti6.
LL>ud6e 43o 3ad a,ted as liti6ation ,ounsel /or ,orporation /or 12 -ear period and 43o possessed several 3undred s3ares o/ its sto,k" a,0uired durin6 ,ourse o/ 3is asso,iation 4it3 ,orporation" 4as re0uired to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ /rom all /urt3er matters in ,ase 43ere ,orporation" alt3ou63 not a part-" 3ad /inan,ial interest in its out,ome. Cali/ornia v Nleppe )19''" !C Cal* 431 F $upp 1344. ;Cited 1 times /or t3is le6al issue< $tate o/ Cal. v. Nleppe" 431 F.$upp. 1344 C.!.Cal."19'' !istri,t Court 5ud6e 43o served /or t4elve -ears as ,ounsel to a ,orporation 43ose /inan,ial interest 4ould be si6ni/i,antl- a//e,ted b- t3e out,ome o/ t3e liti6ation in 0uestion and 43o possessed several 3undred s3ares o/ sto,k in t3e ,orporation 4as re0uired to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ upon presentation o/ proper a//idavit alle6in6 t3at t3e ,ourt@s impartialit- mi63t reasonabl- be 0uestioned in t3e matter. 2( #.$.C.:. MM 144 " 455 . )a* ;1%F1(9.1< KInterestL in s$*Hect 6atter or .art3D Courts /a,ed 4it3 ,onstruin6 subse,tion )b*)4* 3ave in/erred t3at +an- ot3er interest t3at ,ould be substantialla//e,ted2 means an interest in t3e sub5e,t matter o/ t3e liti6ation or a part- to it. ;In re Are:el ?urnha! La!6ert% Inc. )2nd Cir. 19((* (%1 F2d 130'" 1314<

W:CHH8?: H:$ M JC ! W?9H W LL$ F:JCH :B! ?B =:J9?C#L:J W:CHH8?: $ C#J?9? $ H:$ D CHM W LL$ F:JCH ?B8 $9M B9 :!8?$HJ$" LLC.
M-CM #oldin!s, Inc. v. Credit S$isse 7irst &oston Cor.., 202 7.S$...2d 128 %S.-.'.@.,Ma3 20, 2002)

!e/ined t3e rule /or dis0uali/i,ation /rom t3e o4ners3ip o/ sto,k o/ parent and ,ontrolled )parties* subsidiar-)ies*" o4ners3ip re0uires dis0uali/i,ation.
?n ,lass a,tion la4suit brou63t b- issuers o/ initial publi, o//erin6s )?=Hs* alle6in6 t3at under4riter violated ,ontra,ts related to t3e ?=Hs" under4riter moved /or ,ourt@s dis0uali/i,ation. 93e !istri,t Court" $,3eindlin" >." 3eld t3atF )1* putative ,lass members did not 0uali/- as a +part- to t3e pro,eedin62 under statute re0uirin6 re,usal o/ a 5ud6e 43o kno4s s3e 3as a /inan,ial interest in a part- to t3e pro,eedin67 )2* 5ud6e@s o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in putative ,lass members did not re0uire re,usal7 and )3* 5ud6e@s o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in ,orporations t3at o4ned s3ares in issuer de/endants in a related a,tion did not dis0uali/- 3er. Motion denied. ;1< J$d!es 221 43

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k41 =e,uniar- ?nterest 22'k43 k. $to,k3older o/ ,orporation. Most Cited Cases =utative ,lass members do not ,onstitute parties to t3e pro,eedin6s under statute re0uirin6 re,usal o/ a 5ud6e 43o kno4s s3e 3as a /inan,ial interest in a part- to t3e pro,eedin6. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4*.

;2< J$d!es 221

43

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k41 =e,uniar- ?nterest 22'k43 k. $to,k3older o/ ,orporation. Most Cited Cases !istri,t 5ud6e@s o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in putative ,lass members in ,ontra,t a,tions involvin6 initial publi, o//erin6s )?=H* did not dis0uali/- 3er /rom presidin6 over a,tions" even t3ou63 5ud6e o4ned sto,k in ,ompanies t3at mi63t be in,luded as plainti//s in liti6ation" 43ere ,ompanies 3ad not -et been in,luded in de/ined and ,erti/ied ,lass or 6iven opportunit- to opt out" and e//e,t o/ liti6ation on pri,es o/ ,ompanies@ sto,ks 4as spe,ulative. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4*. ;3< J$d!es 221 43

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k41 =e,uniar- ?nterest 22'k43 k. $to,k3older o/ ,orporation. Most Cited Cases !istri,t 5ud6e 4as not dis0uali/ied /rom presidin6 over se,urities ,lass a,tions arisin6 out o/ initial publi, o//erin6s )?=Hs* as result o/ 3er o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in ,orporations t3at o4ned s3ares in issuer de/endants" LL43ere ,orporations in 43i,3 5ud6e o4ned sto,k did not 3ave ,ontrollin6 interests in an- o/ de/endants" and e//e,t o/ liti6ation on ,orporations@ sto,k pri,es 4as spe,ulative. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)4*. ;4< J$d!es 221 43

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k41 =e,uniar- ?nterest 22'k43 k. $to,k3older o/ ,orporation. Most Cited Cases !istri,t 5ud6e@s impartialit- ,ould not be reasonable 0uestioned" so as to re0uire 5ud6e@s re,usal in ,ontra,t a,tions involvin6 initial publi, o//erin6s )?=H*" be,ause o/ 5ud6e@s o4ners3ip o/ sto,k in t4o putative ,lass members and in t4o ,ompanies t3at o4ned sto,k in de/endants. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)a*. $PI=I$= A=A $BAEB $CH ?B!L?B" !istri,t >ud6e. I. I'?:4-UC?I4' Hn H,tober 1'" 2001" LL,ertain under4riter de/endants )t3e +Movin6 !e/endants2* moved /or t3is Court to dis0uali/- itsel/ pursuant to 2( #.$.C. M 455 in In re Initial Pu6lic $''ering )ecurities Litigation% 21 MC 92)$:$* )+?=H se,urities liti6ation2*. )ee 10S1'S01 Boti,e o/ Motion. 93at motion 4as denied on Bovember 2(" 2001. )ee In re Initial Pu6. $''ering )ecs. Litig.% 1'4 F.$upp.2d '0 )$.!.B.K.2001*. 93e Movin6 !e/endants t3en /iled a petition /or a 4rit o/ mandamus 4it3 t3e #nited $tates Court o/ :ppeals /or t3e $e,ond Cir,uit on !e,ember 13" 2001. : 4eek later" t3is Court determined t3at anot3er ,ase" MACM *oldings% Inc. v. Credit )uisse irst ?oston Corp.% 01 Civ. 9333" s3ould be ,oordinated 4it3 t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation /or pretrial purposes. )ee 12S21S01 9rans,ript )+9r.2* at 3. 93e de,ision to ,oordinate t3e t4o ,ases rested in part on t3e /a,t t3at t3e ,ases 3ave similar /a,tual alle6ations" even t3ou63 MACM *oldings is brou63t under state la4 on be3al/ +o/ 1(2 #.$.&domi,iled issuers t3at ;Credit $uisse< led or ,o&led2 sin,e

199( and t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation is brou63t under /ederal la4 on be3al/ o/ all s3are3olders 43o o4ned t3e ?=H sto,k.FB1 1S4S02 9r. at 5. )ee also Fed.J.Civ.=. 42)a*7 Jule 15)a* o/ t3e Lo,al Jules /or t3e !ivision o/ Dusiness :mon6 !istri,t >ud6es. FB1. >urisdi,tion over MACM *oldings is based on diversit- o/ ,itiIens3ip. )ee :mended Complaint" MACM *oldings% Inc. v. Credit )uisse irst ?oston Corp.% Bo. 01 Civ. 9333 )/iled Februar- 4" 2002*" V 4 ),itin6 2( #.$.C. M 1332*. 93e ori6inal ,omplaint 4as /iled on Ma- 25" 2001" in t3e $out3ern !istri,t o/ Florida. Hn H,tober 5" 2001" Credit $uisse and M!CM Holdin6s" ?n,." presented t3e Florida distri,t ,ourt 4it3 a 5oint stipulation askin6 /or a trans/er to t3is Court. 93at trans/er 4as ordered on H,tober 10" 2001. Hn >anuar- 4" 2002" Credit $uisse" a de/endant in MACM *oldings and a Movin6 !e/endant in t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation"/160 ar6ued t3at t3is Court s3ould dis0uali/- itsel/ /rom presidin6 over MACM *oldings be,ause o/ its sto,k o4ners3ip in Fair,3ild $emi,ondu,tors and >upiter Communi,ations" t4o o/ t3e putative members o/ t3e plainti//s@ ,lass in MACM *oldings.FB2 )ee 1S4S02 9r. at 3&4. Credit $uisse ar6ued t3at re,usal 4as re0uired be,ause t3ese t4o issuers 4ere +part;ies< to t3e pro,eedin6"2 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)4*. FB3 )ee id. at 5. Credit $uisse also ar6ued t3at dis0uali/i,ation 4as re0uired under 2( #.$.C. M 455)a*" alt3ou63 it ,on,eded t3at t3is issue 4as +eAa,tl- t3e same2 as t3e one re5e,ted b- t3is Court in t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation. 1S04S02 9r. at %. )ee also In re Initial Pu6. $''ering )ecs. Litig.% 1'4 F.$upp.2d at 92&93. De,ause t3e de,ision on t3e mandamus petition 4as still pendin6" ? a6reed not to de,ide an- substantive motions in eit3er ,ase until t3e $e,ond Cir,uit 3ad issued its opinion. )ee 1S4S02 9r. at 10. FB2. Fair,3ild $emi,ondu,tors and >upiter are not de/endants in t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation. )ee 1S4S02 9r. at 4. FB3. $e,tion 455)b*)4* re0uires a 5ud6e to dis0uali/- 3ersel/ i/F +;$3e< kno4s t3at ;s3e<" individuall- or as a /idu,iar-" or ;3er< spouse or minor ,3ild residin6 in ;3er< 3ouse3old" has a /inan,ial interest in t3e sub5e,t matter in ,ontrovers- or in a party to the proceeding% or an- ot3er interest t3at ,ould be substantiall- a//e,ted b- t3e out,ome o/ t3e pro,eedin6.2 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)4* )emp3asis added*. Hn :pril 1" 2002" t3e $e,ond Cir,uit denied t3e Movin6 !e/endants@ petition. )ee In re Certain (nderwriter Ae'endants% 294 F.3d 29'" &&&& )2d Cir.2002*. Bo4 t3at t3e $e,ond Cir,uit 3as issued its de,ision" Credit $uisse@s motion in MACM *oldings must be resolved. ?n addition" ? must ,onsider anot3er issue t3at no part- 3as raisedF ? ,urrentl- o4n sto,k in LL:HL 9ime Warner" ?n,." )+:HL2* and LL?ntel Corporation )+?ntel2*" ,ompanies t3at" a,,ordin6 to t3e parties@ /inan,ial dis,losure statements" o4n sto,k in /ive o/ t3e ,ompanies t3at are issuer de/endants in t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation.FB4 93e 0uestion is 43et3er t3is /inan,ial interest mandates re,usal.FB5 FB4. :HL o4ns sto,k in C3ina.,om" i8illa6e.,om" Hpen98 Corp. and 9i8o.,om. )ee 5S9S02 Letter /rom Ban,- . !elane-" Counsel /or C3ina.,om )statin6 t3at :HL o4ns %.%\ o/ C3ina.,om*7 5S13S02 Letter /rom Holl- M. !ellenbau63" Counsel /or i8illa6e.,om )statin6 t3at :HL o4ns 4.%\ o/ i8illa6e.,om*7 5S1%S02 Letter /rom C-nt3ia :. !-" Counsel /or Hpen98 Corp. )statin6 t3at :HL o4ns %.4\ o/ Hpen98 Corp.*7 5S1%S02 Letter /rom =atri,ia M. Crande" Counsel /or 9i8o.,om )statin6 t3at :HL o4ns 11.(\ o/ 9i8o.,om*. W3ile t3e 1.9 statement dis,loses t3at ?ntel o4ns sto,k in Li0uid :udio" ?n,." +?ntel ,urrentl- does not 3old a substantial interest )5\ or more o/ outstandin6 s3ares*" i/ an-" in Li0uid :udio.2 5S1%S02 Letter /rom C-nt3ia :. !-" Counsel /or Li0uid :udio. FB5. :t t3e Court@s dire,tion" t3e movin6 de/endants ,ondu,ted an eAtensive

,on/li,t ,3e,k but did not raise t3is issue as a potential ,on/li,t. )ee In re Initial Pu6. $''ering )ecs. Litig.% 1'4 F.$upp.2d at '(. Ho4ever" +even i/ t3e parties do not move /or re,usal" se,tion 455 ,reates an independent dutre0uirin6 /ederal 5ud6es to evaluate in ever- ,ase 43et3er t3e- s3ould dis0uali/- t3emselves.2 Id. at '4&'5. II. ('(L@SIS (. Stoc5 48nershi. in +$tative Me6*ers o0 the +lainti00 Class :s mentioned above" t3is Court ,urrentl- o4ns sto,k in t4o ,ompanies t3at entered into a ,ontra,t 4it3 Credit $uisse to under4rite t3eir respe,tive ?=Hs. LLDe,ause/161 se,tion 455)b* re0uires a 5ud6e to re,use 3ersel/ i/ s3e kno4s t3at s3e 3as +a /inan,ial interest ... in a part- to t3e pro,eedin6"2 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)4*" t3e /irst 0uestion is 43et3er t3ese putative ,lass members are +part;ies< to t3e pro,eedin6.2 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)4*. 93is issue 4as raised b- t3e Movin6 !e/endants in t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation 43ere m- son and ?" as /ormer o4ners o/ ,ertain ?=H sto,ks" 4ere putative ,lass members until 4e 4aived an- interest in t3e a,tions. )ee In re Initial Pu6. $''ering )ecs. Litig.% 1'4 F.$upp.2d at 92&93. ?n t3at ,ase" t3e Movin6 !e/endants ar6ued t3at ? 4as dis0uali/ied /rom presidin6 over t3e ,ase be,ause m- son and ? 4ere +part;ies< to t3e pro,eedin62 under subse,tion )b*)5*)i*.FB% )ee id. 93e $e,ond Cir,uit" 3o4ever" 3eld t3at re,usal 4as not re0uired be,ause ? 4as no lon6er a putative ,lass member due to divesture and 4aiver. )ee id. at&. FB%. $ubse,tion )b*)5* states in pertinent partF )b* ;: >ud6e< ,ir,umstan,esF s3all also dis0uali/;3er<sel/ in t3e /ollo4in6

)5* ;$3e< or ;3er< spouse" or a person 4it3in t3e t3ird de6ree o/ relations3ip to eit3er o/ t3em" or t3e spouse o/ su,3 a personF )i* Is a party to the proceeding% or an o//i,er" dire,tor" or trustee o/ a part- ... 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)5* )emp3asis added*. ;1<;2< W3ile t3e $e,ond Cir,uit never rea,3ed t3e issue o/ 43et3er putative ,lass members are deemed to be parties to t3e pro,eedin6s"FB' ever- ,ourt t3at 3as addressed t3is issue 3as ,on,luded t3at t3e- are not. )ee #ra!onte v. Chrysler Corp.% 13% F.3d 1025" 1030 )5t3 Cir.199(* )3oldin6 t3at +members o/ a putative ,lass are not .parties@ to a ,lass a,tion /or t3ese purposes ;under se,tion 455)b*)5* <.2*7 =ew $rleans Pu6. )erv. v. (nited "as Pipe Line Co.% '19 F.2d '33" '35 )5t3 Cir.19(3* )3oldin6 t3at 5ud6es are not dis0uali/ied i/ t3e- are onl- putative ,lass members*7 LeBoy v. City o' *ouston% 592 F.$upp. 415" 419 )$.!.9eA.19(4* )+?/ not3in6 more" to 3old a 5ud6e to be a .part-1 in an- situation 43ere 3e 4as a member o/ a potential ,lass 4ould do violen,e to t3e rules 6overnin6 ,lass a,tions.... 93e interests o/ a potential member o/ a ,lass are too .un,ertain1 to 5usti/- 3oldin6 t3ose potential members to be parties under M 455.2*.FB( D- de/inition" a putative ,lass member is onl- a potential ,lass member" rat3er t3an a part- in /a,t. )ee id. :t most" t3is Court ,urrentl- 3as a /inan,ial interest in t4o ,ompanies t3at ma-" or ma- not" be parties to t3is liti6ation )as a member o/ t3e plainti// ,lass* at some /uture date. $u,3 an interest is too spe,ulative to tri66er t3e re,usal provisions o/ se,tion 455)b*)4*. FB'. 93e $e,ond Cir,uit did not de,ide 43et3er putative ,lass members are parties to t3e pro,eedin6s be,ause m- son and ? 3ad alread- divested our ,lass

interests. 93us" t3e $e,ond Cir,uit onl- addressed t3e narro4 0uestion o/ 43et3er a divested interest re0uires re,usal. )ee also In re Initial Pu6. $''ering )ecs. Litig.% 1'4 F.$upp.2d at 93 )+93e issue ;o/ 43et3er a putative ,lass member is a part- to t3e pro,eedin6< is moot" o/ ,ourse" be,ause ? 3ave 4aived m- status as a potential ,lass member.2*. ?n ,ontrast" t3e issue t3at is no4 s0uarel- be/ore t3is Court is 43et3er 3avin6 a /inan,ial interest in a putative ,lass member re0uires re,usal under se,tion 455)b*)4*. )ee 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)4* )a 5ud6e s3all dis0uali/- 3ersel/ i/ +;s3e< kno4s t3at ;s3e< 3as a /inan,ial interest ... in a part- to t3e pro,eedin6....2*. FB(. )ee also 13: C3arles :. Wri63t" :rt3ur J. Miller U d4ard H. Cooper" ederal Practice and Procedure% 2001 $upplement" at M 354( n. 5 )+Members o/ a putative ,lass are not .parties@ /or purposes o/ 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)5*.2*. +H/ ,ourse" i/ t3e ,lass 4ere alread- ,erti/ied and it in,luded t3is Court" t3e Court 4ould be ;a< .part- to t3e pro,eedin6.1 2 In re Initial Pu6. $''ering )ecs. Litig.% 1'4 F.$upp.2d at 92 n. 34 ),itin6 /162In re Ce!ent Antitrust Litig.% %(( F.2d 129'" 1315 )9t3 Cir.19(2**. 93ere/ore" i/ Fair,3ild $emi,ondu,tors and >upiter Communi,ations are in,luded in t3e de/ined and ,erti/ied ,lass" and t3e- do not opt out" t3is Court must eit3er sell its sto,k or dis0uali/- itsel/ be/ore an- /urt3er substantive de,isions are made. )ee 2( #.$.C. M 455)/*7 c'. (nion Car6ide Corp. v. (.). Cutting )erv.% Inc.% '(2 F.2d '10" '14 )'t3 Cir.19(%* )=osner" >.* )3oldin6 t3at a 5ud6e need not re,use 3ersel/ i/ a ,on/li,t arises /or t3e /irst time in t3e middle o/ t3e liti6ation as lon6 as s3e +divested ;3er<sel/ o/ t3e interest as soon as ;s3e< dis,overed it;"< and made no rulin6s bet4een t3e date o/ dis,over- and t3e date o/ divestment.2*. 93e se,ond 0uestion raised under subse,tion )b*)4* is 43et3er t3e sto,k ? o4n +,ould be su6stantially a//e,ted b- t3e out,ome o/ t3e pro,eedin62 at t3is sta6e o/ t3e liti6ation. 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)4* )emp3asis added*. !e,idin6 t3is 0uestion re0uires spe,ulation as to )1* 43et3er t3e ,ompanies 4ill be in,luded in t3e ,lass" )2* 43et3er an- ,ompanies 4ill re,over mone- /rom t3e ,lass a,tion" and )3* 3o4 su,3 re,over- 4ill a//e,t t3e pri,es o/ t3e ,ompanies@ sto,k. :t t3is time" t3e e//e,t o/ t3is liti6ation on t3e pri,es o/ t3ese t4o sto,ks is" at best" +remote" ,ontin6ent" or spe,ulative2 and t3us ,annot serve as a basis /or dis0uali/i,ation. In re Initial Pu6. $''ering )ecs. Litig.% 1'4 F.$upp.2d at 92 )0uotation marks and ,itations omitted*. &. Stoc5 48nershi. in a Co6.an3 that #as a 7inancial Interest in a +art3 to the +roceedin! #nder se,tion 455)b*" t3e same t4o 0uestions are raised b- m- o4ners3ip o/ :HL and ?ntel" ,orporations LLt3at o4n sto,k in /ive issuer de/endants in t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation. )ee supra note 4. #nder t3e plain lan6ua6e o/ t3e statute" su,3 sto,k o4ners3ip does not ,onstitute a dis0uali/-in6 interest be,ause it is not a +/inan,ial interest in a part- to t3e pro,eedin6.2 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)4* )emp3asis added*. Jat3er" t3e- are /inan,ial interests in ,orporations t3at" in turn" 3ave an interest in parties to t3e pro,eedin6s. :nd" /or t3e same reasons 6iven above" it ,annot be said t3at t3e sto,k pri,e o/ :HL or ?ntel 4ill be substantiall- a//e,ted bt3e out,ome o/ t3is liti6ation. H/ ,ourse" /orm must not be elevated over substan,e. LL?/ t3ese ,ompanies 4ere o4ned eA,lusivel- b- :HL or ?ntel" or t3e ,ompanies 4ere ,orporate subsidiaries" t3en sto,k o4ners3ip in :HL or ?ntel 4ould re0uire dis0uali/i,ation i/ not promptl- sold. :t t3e same time" not3in6 in t3e teAt o/ se,tion 455)b* or its le6islative 3istorindi,ates t3at Con6ress intended to re0uire dis0uali/i,ation 43enever a 5ud6e o4ned sto,k in a ,ompan- t3at is a s3are3older in a part- )e.g.% i/ :HL 4as not a parent ,orporation but onl- o4ned a small per,enta6e o/ s3ares in a part- to t3is

liti6ation*. ;3< 93e ke- 0uestion is 43et3er t3e ,ompan- in 43i,3 t3e 5ud6e o4ns sto,k 3as e//e,tive ,ontrol over t3e part- to t3e liti6ation&t3at is" at least 50\ o/ t3e votin6 sto,k or a ma5orit- o/ t3e ,apital interest in t3e part-. FB9 LL93us" /or eAample" a 5ud6e 43o o4ns sto,k in a ,orporation t3at +3olds (0\ o/ t3e outstandin6 sto,k o/ ;a /163 part- to t3e pro,eedin6s< t3rou63 one o/ its 43oll- o4ned subsidiaries2 must dis0uali/- 3ersel/ unless s3e 3as properl- divested 3ersel/ o/ o4ners3ip. >idder% Pea6ody < Co. v. Ma:us Energy Corp.% 925 F.2d 55%" 5%1 )2d Cir.1991*. ?n ,ontrast" be,ause :HL and ?ntel do not eAer,ise ,ontrol over an- o/ t3e issuer de/endants" msto,k o4ners3ip does not tri66er t3e dis0uali/i,ation provision o/ se,tion 455)b*)4*. FB9. C'. Canon 3.1&1)/* o/ t3e Code o' Conduct 'or (nited )tates Judges )+W3en a parent ,ompan- does not o4n all or a ma5orit- o/ sto,k in t3e subsidiar-" a 5ud6e s3ould determine 43et3er t3e parent 3as control o/ t3e subsidiar-" ne,essitatin6 re,usal.2* )emp3asis added*7 >udi,ial Con/eren,e o/ t3e #nited $tates" Committee on Codes o/ Condu,t" :dvisor- Hpinion Bo. 5' )revised 199(* )+;W<3ere a 5ud6e kno4s t3at a part- is controlled b- a ,orporation in 43i,3 t3e 5ud6e o4ns sto,k" t3e 5ud6e s3ould dis0uali/- in t3e pro,eedin6.2* )emp3asis added*. ?t is 4ort3 emp3asiIin6 t3at Lo,al Jule 1.9 providesF 9o enable 5ud6es and ma6istrate 5ud6es o/ t3e ,ourt to evaluate possible dis0uali/i,ation or re,usal" ,ounsel /or a private )non&6overnmental* part- s3all submit at t3e time o/ /ilin6 t3e initial pleadin6 or ot3er ,ourt paper )e.6." ,omplaint" ans4er" noti,e o/ motion" noti,e o/ removal* on be3al/ o/ t3at part- a ,erti/i,ate o/ identi/i,ation o/ any corporate or other parents% su6sidiaries% or a''iliates o' that party% se,urities or ot3er interests in 43i,3 are publi,l- 3eld. : revised ,erti/i,ate o/ identi/i,ation s3all be /iled promptl- upon an- ,3an6e in su,3 corporate parents% su6sidiaries or a''iliates. $.!.B.K. Lo,al Civ. J. 1.9 )emp3asis added*.FB10 Jule 1.9 onl- re0uires parties to dis,lose pu6licly-owned parents )i.e.% ,orporations t3at ,ontrol t3em*" subsidiaries )i.e.% ,orporations t3at t3e- ,ontrol*" or ot3er a//iliates .FB11 ?t 4as t3us inappropriate /or t3e issuer de/endants to in,lude non&,ontrollin6 sto,k interests in t3eir ,ompanies in t3eir dis,losure statements. Civen t3e limited resour,es o/ t3e Court" 43i,3 must revie4 3undreds o/ 1.9 statements ever- -ear" parties s3ould onldis,lose 43at t3e lo,al rule re0uires. FB10. 93e Lo,al Jules are 444.n-sd.us,ourts.6ovSrulesSrules.3tm. available online at 3ttpFSS

FB11. 93e parties seem to misread Jule 1.9 to re0uire dis,losure o/ +;1< an,orporate or ot3er parents" ;2< subsidiaries" or ;3< a//iliates o/ t3at part-" ;4< se,urities or ;5< ot3er interests in 43i,3 are publi,l- 3eld.2 $.!.B.K. Lo,al Civ. J. 1.9. :s t3e ,onteAt o/ t3e Jule 1.9 makes ,lear" t3e p3rase +se,urities or ot3er interests in 43i,3 are publi,l- 3eld2 onl- serves to modi/- t3e t-pe o/ interest t3at must be dis,losed. ?t is /or t3is reason t3at Jule 1.9 onl- re0uires t3at t3e parties /ile a ne4 ,erti/i,ate +promptl- upon an- ,3an6e in su,3 ,orporate parents" subsidiaries or a//iliates.2 Id. C. :ec$sal Under Section 422%a) ;4< + ven 43ere t3e /a,ts do not su//i,e /or re,usal under M 455)b*" 3o4ever" t3ose same /a,ts ma- be eAamined as part o/ an in0uir- into 43et3er re,usal is mandated under M 455)a*.2 In re Certain (nderwriter Ae'endants% 294 F.3d at &&&&. $e,tion 455)a* re0uires a 5ud6e to dis0uali/- 3ersel/ i/ 3er partialit- +mi63t

reasonabl- be 0uestioned.2 2( #.$.C. M 455)a*. + Aamination o/ t3e reasons 6iven /or re,usal under M 455)a* .is not me,3ani,al but re0uires an eAer,ise o/ reasoned 5ud6ment.1 2 In re Certain (nderwriter Ae'endants% 294 F.3d. at &&&& )0uotin6 In re Aguinda% 241 F.3d 194" 201 )2d Cir.2001* *. Moreover" +t3e 6rounds asserted in a re,usal motion must be s,rutiniIed 4it3 ,are and 5ud6es s3ould not re,use t3emselves solel- be,ause a part- ,laims an appearan,e o/ partialit-.2 In re Aguinda% 241 F.3d at 201. +Liti6ants ou63t not 3ave to /a,e a 5ud6e 43ere t3ere is a reasonable 0uestion o/ impartialit-" but t3e- are not entitled to 5ud6es o/ t3eir o4n ,3oi,e.2 Id. )0uotin6 $.Jep. Bo. 93&419" at 5 )19'3*7 H.J.Jep. Bo. 93&1453 )19'4*" reprinted in 19'4 #.$.C.C.:.B. %351" %355*. ?n In re Certain (nderwriter Ae'endants% t3e $e,ond Cir,uit revie4ed t3is Court@s sto,k o4ners3ip and /ound no 6round /or dis0uali/i,ation under /164se,tion 455)a*. 93e onl- ne4 in/ormation raised b- Credit $uisse in t3e MACM *oldings motion is mo4ners3ip in Fair,3ild $emi,ondu,tors and >upiter Communi,ations. 93ese interests do not a//e,t m- determination t3at +an ob5e,tive" disinterested observer /ull- in/ormed o/ t3e underl-in6 /a,ts2 4ould not entertain a +si6ni/i,ant doubt t3at 5usti,e 4ould be done absent re,usal.2 FB12 In re Aguinda% 241 F.3d at 201. Bor does m- o4ners3ip in :HL and ?ntel a//e,t t3is anal-sis.FB13 FB12. Credit $uisse 3as admitted t3at t3e issue raised under se,tion 455)a* in t3is ,ase is +eAa,tl- t3e same2 as t3e one raised in t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation. 1S04S02 9r. at %. ?/ re,usal is not re0uired in t3e ?=H se,urities liti6ation" it is not re0uired 3ere. FB13. ?ndeed" t3e parties to t3e ?=H liti6ation 3ave not raised a se,tion 455)a* ,3allen6e based on t3is sto,k o4ners3ip. III. C4'CLUSI4' For t3e reasons set /ort3 above" ? /ind t3at t3ere is no ,on/li,t under se,tion 455)b*)4* or se,tion 455)a*. )ee In re Aguinda% 241 F.3d at 201 )+;W<3ere t3e standards 6overnin6 dis0uali/i,ation 3ave not been met" dis0uali/i,ation is not optional7 rat3er" it is pro3ibited.2*. :,,ordin6l-" Credit $uisse@s motion in MACM *oldings is denied. :meri,an >urispruden,e" $e,ond dition !atabase updated Bovember 2011 Federal Courts >o3n Dourdeau" >.!.7 Laura Hunter !ietI" >.!.7 Nerr- !i66in" >.!.7 Jomualdo =. ,lavea" >.!.7 9ra,- Dateman Farrell" >.!.7 :lan >. >a,obs" >.!.7 Ja,3el M. Nane" M.:." >.!.7 Fern Nletter" >.!.7 $on5a Larsen" >.!.7 Lu,as Martin" >.!.7 >e//re- >. $3ampo" >.!.7 ri, C. $urette" >.!.7 Darbara 8an :rsdale" >.!.7 Mar- llen West" >.!.7 and leanor L. Crossman" >.!.7 Mar- Dabb Morris" >.!.7 and >a0ualin Friend =eterson" >.!. o/ t3e Bational Le6al Jesear,3 Croup" ?n,. ??. >ud6es . !is0uali/i,ation and Je,usal o/ >ud6es 2. Crounds /or !is0uali/i,ation d. ?nterest o/ >ud6e or >ud6e@s Jelative in Case )1* ?n Ceneral 9opi, $ummar- Je/eren,es I ,2. Interest that co$ld *e s$*stantiall3 a00ected *3 o$tco6e o0 .roceedin!N H$d!e .art3 to .roceedin!

: 5ud6e is usuall- re0uired to dis0uali/- 3im or 3ersel/ automati,all- i/ t3e 5ud6e is named as a part- in a ,ase";5< alt3ou63 t3e 5ud6e need not dis0uali/- 3im or 3ersel/ i/ 3e or s3e is a part- in anot3er ,ase";%< or i/ a part- attempts or t3reatens to initiate separate pro,eedin6s a6ainst t3e 5ud6e.;'< : 5ud6e 43o is named as a de/endant in a plainti//@s amended ,omplaint is not re0uired to dis0uali/- 3im or 3ersel/ LLunless t3ere is a le6itimate basis /or suin6 t3e 5ud6e.;(< For a 5ud6e to be dis0uali/ied simpl- be,ause t3e plainti// 3as sued t3at 5ud6e 4ould be to allo4 t3e plainti// to manipulate t3e identit- o/ t3e de,ision&maker and t3us to en6a6e in 5ud6e&s3oppin6.;9< ;FB5< #.$. v. Corri6an" 401 F. $upp. '95 )!. W-o. 19'5*" 5ud6ment rev@d on ot3er 6rounds" 54( F.2d ('9 )10t3 Cir. 19''*. ;FB%< Coltrane v. 9empleton" 10% F. 3'0 )C.C.:. 4t3 Cir. 1901*. ;FB'< $,arrella v. Mid4est Federal $av. and Loan" 53% F.2d 120'" 21 Fed. J. $erv. 2d 1033 )(t3 Cir. 19'%*7 #.$. v. Crismore" 5%4 F.2d 929 )10t3 Cir. 19''*.

LL;FB(< :ndersen v. JosIko4ski" %(1 F. $upp. 12(4 )B.!. ?ll. 19((*" 5ud6ment a//@d" (94 F.2d 133( )'t3 Cir. 1990*.
;FB9< :ndersen v. JosIko4ski" %(1 F. $upp. 12(4 )B.!. ?ll. 19((*" 5ud6ment a//@d" (94 F.2d 133( )'t3 Cir. 1990*. (5ers v. einshien5, 320 7ed.(..E. 2,2 %10th Cir.%Colo.),4ct 23, 200,)

=ositive out,ome ,ase

&ac5!ro$ndD Federal prison inmate brou63t ?ivens a,tion ,3allen6in6 ,onditions o/ 3is ,on/inement. 93e #nited $tates !istri,t Court /or t3e !istri,t o/ Colorado" Eita L. Weins3ienk" $enior !istri,t >ud6e" 2009 WL 11494(0" sua sponte dismissed a,tion" and inmate appealed. #oldin!D 93e Court o/ :ppeals" $tep3en H. :nderson" Cir,uit >ud6e" 3eld t3at distri,t 5ud6e@s /ailure to re,use 3ersel/ 4as abuse o/ dis,retion. 8a,ated and remanded. West Headnotes 7ederal Co$rts 110& ,32.1

1'0D Federal Courts 1'0D8??? Courts o/ :ppeals 1'0D8???)L* !etermination and !isposition o/ Cause 1'0Dk932 Jeversal or 8a,ation o/ >ud6ment in Ceneral 1'0Dk932.1 k. ?n 6eneral. Most Cited Cases 7ederal Co$rts 110& ,21.1

1'0D Federal Courts 1'0D8??? Courts o/ :ppeals 1'0D8???)L* !etermination and !isposition o/ Cause 1'0Dk951 =o4ers" !uties and =ro,eedin6s o/ Lo4er Court :/ter

Jemand

1'0Dk951.1 k. ?n 6eneral. Most Cited Cases

De,ause 5ud6e@s /ailure to re,use 3ersel/ /rom /ederal prison inmate@s ?ivens a,tion" in 43i,3 s3e 4as named as part- de/endant" violated ,lear statutor- mandate and 4as abuse o/ dis,retion" 5ud6e@s sua sponte dismissal o/ a,tion due to inmate@s /ailure to ,ompl- per/e,tl- 4it3 lo,al ,ivil rules 4as t3ere/ore va,ated on appeal and a,tion 4as remanded /or assi6nment to anot3er 5ud6e. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)5*)i*. /2,2 Mont6omer- Carl :kers" #$= Floren,e :dmaA" Floren,e" CH" pro se. De/ore 9:CH:" :B! J$HB" and D L" Cir,uit >ud6es. 4:-E: ('- JU-9ME'?FBL FBL :/ter eAaminin6 t3e brie/s and appellate re,ord" t3is panel 3as determined unanimousl- t3at oral ar6ument 4ould not materiall- assist t3e determination o/ t3is appeal. )ee Fed. J.:pp. =. 34)a*)2*7 10t3 Cir. J. 34.1)C*. 93e ,ase is t3ere/ore ordered submitted 4it3out oral ar6ument. 93is order and 5ud6ment is not bindin6 pre,edent" eA,ept under t3e do,trines o/ la4 o/ t3e ,ase" res 5udi,ata" and ,ollateral estoppel. ?t ma- be ,ited" 3o4ever" /or its persuasive value ,onsistent 4it3 Fed. J.:pp. =. 32.1 and 10t3 Cir. J. 32.1. $9 =H B H. :B! J$HB" Cir,uit >ud6e. //1 Mont6omer- Carl :kers" a /ederal prisoner pro,eedin6 pro se" ,3allen6es t3e distri,t ,ourt@s sua sponte dismissal o/ 3is ?ivensFB1 a,tion on t3e 6rounds t3at t3e presidin6 5ud6e" Eita L. Weins3ienk" 4as re0uired to re,use /rom t3e ,ase under 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)5*)i* be,ause s3e is a part- de/endant. Aer,isin6 our 5urisdi,tion under 2( #.$.C. M 1291" 4e va,ate t3e distri,t ,ourt@s dismissal order and remand t3is ,ase /or reassi6nment to anot3er 5ud6e. FB1. )ee ?ivens v. )i: (nknown =a!ed Agents% 403 #.$. 3((" 91 $.Ct. 1999" 29 L. d.2d %19 )19'1*. ?. Da,k6round ?n 1995" a/ter /indin6 Mr. :kers to be an abusive liti6ant" t3e #nited $tates !istri,t Court /or t3e !istri,t o/ Colorado entered an order en5oinin6 3im /rom initiatin6 an- la4suit in t3at ,ourt 4it3out representation b- ,ounsel unless 3e /irst obtains leave /rom t3e ,ourt to pro,eed pro se. We up3eld t3e /ilin6&restri,tions order in /2,3 Akers v. )andoval% Bo. 95&130%" 199% WL %35309" at L 1 )10t3 Cir. Bov. 4" 199%* )unpublis3ed*. Compl-in6 4it3 t3at order" in Februar- 2009" Mr. :kers re0uested permission to /ile t3e instant pro se a,tion" 43i,3 alle6es a ,onditions&o/& ,on/inement ,laim arisin6 out o/ 3is in,ar,eration at t3e #nited $tates =enitentiarin Floren,e" Colorado. For reasons un,lear /rom t3e /a,e o/ 3is ,omplaint" in addition to namin6 various emplo-ees o/ #$= Floren,e" Mr. :kers also named as a de/endant #.$. !istri,t >ud6e Weins3ienk" to 43om t3is ,ase 4as ultimatel- assi6ned. >ud6e Weins3ienk" a,tin6 sua sponte" denied Mr. :kers@s re0uest to pro,eed pro se and dismissed t3e a,tion. Her reasonin6 4as t4o/old. First" s3e /ound t3at Mr. :kers 3ad /ailed to ,ompl- 4it3 t3e in 'or!a pauperis statute be,ause 3e 3ad not provided a ,op- o/ 3is prisoner trust /und a,,ount statement. )ee 2( #.$.C. M 1915)a*)2*. $e,ond" s3e /ound Mr. :kers 3ad violated t3e ,ourt@s lo,al rules b- /ailin6 to in,lude a ,omplete list o/ 3is prior la4suits in t3e ,ourt&promul6ated +prisoner ,omplaint /orm.2 Mr. :kers t3en /iled a motion to re,use >ud6e Weins3ienk based on 3er status as a part- de/endant. >ud6e Weins3ienk denied t3at motion" 3o4ever" ,on,ludin6 t3at under United State v. !ri "ore% 264 7. 2d ,2, ) 10th Cir. 1,11*" s3e 4as not re0uired to re,use despite t3e seemin6l- mandator- lan6ua6e o/ M

455)b*)5*)i*. Mr. :kers@s appeal /o,uses eA,lusivel- on >ud6e Weins3ienk@s re/usal to re,use. ??. !is,ussion We revie4 t3e denial o/ a motion to re,use /or abuse o/ dis,retion. (nited )tates v. MendoCa% 4%( F.3d 125%" 12%2 )10t3 Cir.200%*. +;#<nder t3at standard 4e 4ill up3old a distri,t ,ourt@s de,ision unless it is an arbitrar-" ,apri,ious" 43imsi,al" or mani/estl- unreasonable 5ud6ment.2 *iggan6otha! v. $klaho!a e: rel. $kla. #ransp. Co!!Gn% 32( F.3d %3(" %45 )10t3 Cir.2003* )internal 0uotation marks omitted*. 93e statutor- provision at issue provides t3at a 5ud6e +s3all2 dis0uali/- 3ersel/ in ,ir,umstan,es 43ere s3e is a part- to t3e pro,eedin6. 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)5*)i*. ?n t4o re,ent unpublis3ed orders" 4e eApli,itl- in/ormed >ud6e Weins3ienk t3at t3is provision re0uires 3er re,usal 43en s3e is a named de/endant in t3e a,tion be/ore 3er. )ee @oung v. (nited )tates% 31% Fed.:ppA. '%4" ''3 )10t3 Cir.2009* )appl-in6 3armless error anal-sis to +>ud6e Weins3ienk@s violation o/ M 455)b*)5*)i*2*7 Akers v. Weinshienk% 32' Fed.:ppA. (11" &&&&" 2009 WL 1'(90'4" at L1 )10t3 Cir.2009* )reversin6 and remandin6 /or reassi6nment*. We re,o6niIe t3at t3e se,ond order 4as issued a/ter >ud6e Weins3ienk issued 3er de,ision in t3is ,ase" but nevert3eless" t3e statute plainl- provides /or mandator- re,usal in t3e ,ir,umstan,es presented 3ere. //2 !ri "ore did not announ,e a ,ontrar- 3oldin6. ?n t3at ,ase" a ,riminal de/endant sou63t to dis0uali/- 3is presidin6 5ud6e on t3e 6rounds t3at 3e 4as ,onsiderin6 suin6 t3e 5ud6e in an unrelated ,ivil matter. We ,on,luded t3ere 4ere no 6rounds /or dis0uali/i,ation under M 455" statin6 t3at +;a< 5ud6e is not dis0uali/ied merel- be,ause a liti6ant sues or t3reatens to sue 3im.2 !ri "ore% 264 7. 2d at ,33. >ud6e Weins3ienk ,ontends t3is lan6ua6e insulates 3er de,ision to preside over t3is ,ase not4it3standin6 3er status as a de/endant and our eApress ur6in6 in @oung t3at s3e +/ollo4 t3e plain ,ommand in M 455)b*)5*)i* and re,use 3ersel/ /rom an- /uture ,ases in 43i,3 is s3e is named as a part-"2 31% Fed.:ppA. at ''3. 93e obvious di//eren,e bet4een t3is ,ase and !ri "ore% 3o4ever" is t3at t3e 5ud6e in t3at ,ase 4as not a de/endant" or even at risk o/ be,omin6 a de/endant" in t3e ,ase in /2,4 43i,3 t3e re,usal 4as sou63t. D- ,ontrast" in t3is ,ase" as in @oung and Akers v. Weinshienk% >ud6e Weins3ienk issued a rulin6 dismissin6 an a,tion in 43i,3 s3e 4as a ,urrent de/endant. :bsent bein6 re0uired to sit b- t3e rule o/ ne,essit-" see (nited )tates v. Will% 449 #.$. 200" 213&14" 101 $.Ct. 4'1" %% L. d.2d 392 )19(0*" LL4e are a4are o/ no eA,eption t3at 4ould 3ave 5usti/ied 3er re/usal to re,use under t3ese ,ir,umstan,es.FB2 >ud6e Weins3ienk@s de,ision violated t3e ,lear mandate o/ M 455)b*)5*)i* and 4as an abuse o/ dis,retion. FB2. ?n t3e order den-in6 Mr. :kers@s re,usal motion" >ud6e Weins3ienk ,ites a number o/ de,isions /rom ot3er /ederal distri,t ,ourts and one unpublis3ed First Cir,uit opinion" in 43i,3 t3ose ,ourts 0uestioned t3e ,ompulsor- aspe,t o/ M 455)b*)5*)i*. We are not bound b- t3ose de,isions or persuaded b- t3eir reasonin6. We a6ree 4it3 t3e panel@s approa,3 in Mr. :kers@s earlier ,ase )Bo. 0(&14'1* and 3old t3at M 455)b*)5*)i* imposes an absolute rule re0uirin6 re,usal unless +t3e ,ase ,annot be 3eard ot3er4ise.2 Will% 449 #.$. at 213" 101 $.Ct. 4'1 )internal 0uotation marks omitted*. ?n ,ertain limited ,ir,umstan,es 4e 3ave /ound it appropriate to revie4 an improper re/usal to re,use /or 3armless error. )ee @oung% 31% Fed.:ppA. at ''37 *iggan6otha!% 32( F.3d at %45. Dut 4e ,on,lude su,3 revie4 is not appropriate in t3is ,ase. 93e dismissal o/ t3is a,tion 4as not mandated b- a strai63t/or4ard appli,ation o/ t3e la4 to t3e merits o/ Mr. :kers@s ,laims. C'. *iggan6otha!% 32( F.3d at %4% )revie4in6 /or 3armless error 43ere ,ase presented +strai63t/or4ard 0uestions o/ la42*. Jat3er" in a dis,retionar- rulin6" >ud6e Weins3ienk dismissed Mr. :kers@s ,laims be,ause s3e /ound 3is ,omplian,e 4it3 t3e lo,al ,ivil rules to be less t3an

per/e,t. #nder t3ese ,ir,umstan,es" 4e ,annot sa- 4it3 ,on/iden,e t3at t3e out,ome 4as a /ore6one ,on,lusion be,ause anot3er 5ud6e ma- 3ave ruled di//erentl-. C'. @oung% 31% Fed.:ppA. at ''3 )notin6 4it3 ,on/iden,e +t3at a remand 4ould simpl- result in anot3er 5ud6e rea,3in6 t3e same result as >ud6e Weins3ienk2*. We re,o6niIe t3at on remand anot3er 5ud6e ma- ver- 4ell rea,3 t3e same ,on,lusion as >ud6e Weins3ienk" but 6iven t3e in3erentl- dis,retionar- nature o/ t3e de,ision under revie4" t3at possibilit- is not dispositive. ???. Con,lusion De,ause >ud6e Weins3ienk /ailed to re,use in t3is ,ase as re0uired under 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)5*)i*" t3e 5ud6ment o/ t3e distri,t ,ourt is 8:C:9 ! and t3is a,tion is J M:B! ! /or reassi6nment to anot3er 5ud6e. Mr. :kers@s motion to pro,eed in 'or!a pauperis is CJ:B9 ! and 3e is reminded o/ 3is ,ontinuin6 obli6ation to make partial pa-ments until t3e entire /ilin6 /ee 3as been paid.

W3at is a le6itimate basis. admissible eviden,e

Fa,tual and le6al basis" supported b-

In re MartinO?ri!ona, 213 7.S$... 1231 %-.Conn. J$l 01, 1,83) In re M$r.h3, 2,8 7.S$...2d 121 %-.Me.,7e* 18, 200,)

Be6ative out,ome
Co**le v. >al$e Cit3 7$rnit$re, 2008 L 1,,2086 % .-.G3.,Ma3 06, 2008)

Complaint re0uest /or 6rand 5ur- investi6ation but eviden,e did not provide a le6itmate basis $ear,3 t3e ke-,ite o/ t3is ,ase /or a distin6uis3ed or overruled ,ase to t3e underl-in6 ,ase. #.$. v. Wol/son 55( F.2d 59" %2 )2d Cir. 19''* !e/endant1s un/ounded ,3ar6es o/ mis,ondu,t a6ainst 5ud6e didn1t re0uire dis0uali/i,ation" be,ause de/endant1s remarks +onl- establis3;ed 3is< /eelin6s to4ards ;t3e 5ud6e<" not t3e reverse.
SC( Services, Inc. v. Mor!an, 221 7.2d 110, 40 (.L.:. 7ed. ,42 %1th Cir.%Ill.) J$n 11, 1,11)

:ppearan,e o/ partialit- provides 6rounds /or 4rit o/ mandamus to mandate re,usal o/ /ederal 5ud6e
@o$n! v. U.S., 316 7ed.(..E. 164 %10th Cir.%Colo.) Mar 12, 200,) &ac5!ro$ndD Federal prisoner /iled t4o pro se ,ivil ri63ts ,omplaint" t3e /irst o/ 43i,3 4as dismissed" /or /ailure to /iled amended ,omplaint t3at ,omplied 4it3 lo,al distri,t ,ourt rule and /or /ailure to prose,ute" b- order o/ t3e #nited $tates !istri,t Court /or t3e !istri,t o/ Colorado" Eita L. Weins3ienk" >. =risoner appealed. 93e Court o/ :ppeals" &&& Fed.:ppA. &&&&" 200' WL (315((" reversed and remanded to 6ive prisoner anot3er opportunit- to /ile amended ,omplaint" and t3e !istri,t Court" Weins3ienk" >." a6ain dismissed 43en amended ,omplaint 4as not /iled. =risoner a6ain appealed. $e,ond ,ivil ri63ts a,tion 4as trans/erred to t3e #nited $tates !istri,t Court /or t3e !istri,t o/ Colorado /rom t3e !istri,t o/ Columbia" and t3e Court" Weins3ienk" >." entered dismissal order based on prisoner@s repeated

/ailure to /ile amended ,omplaint t3at ,omplied 4it3 lo,al distri,t ,ourt rule. =risoner appealed" and 3is appeal 4as ,onsolidated 4it3 t3at /rom earlier dismissal order. #oldin!sD 93e Court o/ :ppeals" !avid M. bel" Cir,uit >ud6e" 3eld t3atF )1* distri,t ,ourt order dismissin6 /ederal prisoner@s pro se ,ivil ri63ts ,omplaint 4it3out pre5udi,e to 3is abilit- to re/ile" based on 3is repeated re/usal to ,ompl4it3 distri,t ,ourt order dire,tin6 3im to /ile amended ,omplaint on ,ourt&approved prisoner ,omplaint /orm as re0uired b- lo,al distri,t ,ourt rule" 4as not abuse o/ dis,retion7 )2* distri,t ,ourt 5ud6e 4as re0uired to re,use 3ersel/ /rom se,ond a,tion on,e s3e 4as named as de/endant7 )3* 5ud6e@s error in not re,usin6 3ersel/ 4as 3armless7 and )4* order dismissin6 se,ond a,tion 4as not abuse o/ dis,retion" 6iven prisoner@s utter /ailure to assert an- valid reason to eA,use 3is /ailures to ,ompl- 4it3 distri,t ,ourt@s une0uivo,al orders. ://irmed7 motions /or emer6en,- relie/ denied7 motions to pro,eed 4it3out prepa-ment o/ appellate /ilin6 /ees 6ranted. ;3< J$d!es 221 4,%1)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k49 Dias and =re5udi,e 22'k49)1* k. ?n Ceneral. Most Cited Cases !istri,t ,ourt 5ud6e 4as re0uired to re,use 3ersel/ /rom prisoner@s pro se ,ivil ri63ts a,tion" pursuant to mandator- re,usal provision" on,e s3e 4as named as de/endant. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455)b*)5*)i*.

:t p. ''2"
-. Second (ction %Case 'o. 01OcvO821). //1 ;3< 93e se,ond a,tion presents t3e t3res3old 0uestion o/ 43et3er >ud6e Weins3ienk s3ould 3ave re,used 3ersel/ /rom t3e ,ase be,ause s3e 4as a named de/endant. #nder 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)5*)i*" a 5ud6e must re,use 3ersel/ 43en s3e is a part- to t3e pro,eedin6" and t3is mandator- provision re0uired >ud6e Weins3ienk to re,use 3ersel/ /rom t3e se,ond a,tion. Ginnell v. >ratil, 200, L 1360103 %-.Gan.,Ma3 14, 200,) #$%&$ J?CH:J! !. JHC J$" !istri,t >ud6e. /1 ?n an Hrder dated Mar,3 1'" 2009" t3is ,ourt denied plainti//@s Motion /or Leave to =ro,eed in /orma pauperis based upon 3is prior desi6nation as a t3ree&strikes liti6ant" and 6ranted 3im t3irt- da-s in 43i,3 to submit t3e G350.00 /ilin6 /ee. =lainti// 4as in/ormed t3at /ailure to pa- t3e /ull /ilin6 /ee 4it3in t3e time allotted 4ould result in dismissal o/ t3is a,tion 4it3out pre5udi,e. =lainti// did not pa- t3e /ilin6 /ee. ?nstead" 3e 3as /iled 11 pleadin6s and atta,3ed eA3ibits totalin6 220 pa6es. 93e ,ourt 3as eAamined ea,3 o/ t3e /ilin6s submitted b- Mr. Ninnell" and /inds 3e 3as /ailed to s3o4 t3at M 1915)6* does not appl- to t3is ,ase. Moreover" none o/ t3e /a,ts alle6ed b- 3im su66ests t3at 3e is in +imminent dan6er2 o/ serious p3-si,al in5ur- FB1. :,,ordin6l-" t3e ,ourt ,on,ludes t3is a,tion must be dismissed.

FB1. ?nstead" plainti// merel- ,ontinues 3is pra,ti,e o/ /ilin6 abusive" repetitive" /rivolous" and mali,ious materials re&ar6uin6 ,laims denied and dismissed in prior ,ivil a,tions. He also ,ontinues to re&ar6ue 3is 3abeas ,orpus ,laims in t3is non&3abeas a,tion and 4it3out 3avin6 sou63t 9ent3 Cir,uit pre&aut3oriIation" 43i,3 3e 3as been repeatedl- advised is improper. Finall-" 3e ,ontinues to make ,on,lusor- alle6ations o/ 5udi,ial bias and ,onspira,ies amon6 a m-riad o/ o//i,ials in,ludin6 >usti,e Claren,e 93omas" all 5ud6es o/ t3e 9ent3 Cir,uit and !istri,t o/ Nansas" ot3er ,ourt personnel" ,ertain state ,ourts and 5ud6es" Con6ress" and ot3er $tate and /ederal o//i,ials. 93e onl- di//i,ult issue presented b- Mr. Ninnell@s latest /ilin6s is 43et3er t3e undersi6ned 5ud6e must re,use 3imsel/ /rom t3is ,ase. 93e 0uestion arises be,ause plainti// /iled a pleadin6 entitled +=lainti// 3ere4it3 :mends Complaint upon Fa,ts o/ Clear HomoseAual&Ja,ism b- $enior >ud6e2 )!o,. 5* FB2. ?t is apparent t3at Ninnell intends t3is sin6le do,ument to be 3is :mended Complaint addin6 t3e undersi6ned as a de/endant" as 4ell as 3is Motion to Je,use t3e undersi6ned 5ud6e. FB2. W3ile t3e ,ourt liberall- ,onstrues pro se pleadin6s" Mr. Ninnell 3as been repeatedl- instru,ted b- various 5ud6es on ,on/ormin6 3is pleadin6s and amendments to t3e /ederal rules and dire,ted to provide ,lear" ,orre,t ,aptions and titles on 3is pleadin6s. He is not entitled to liberal ,onstru,tion o/ pleadin6s" in 43i,3 3e ,ontinuousl- i6nores t3e ,ourt@s dire,tives. ?t is 0uestionable t3at t3is pleadin6 s3ould be ,onsidered as 3avin6 e//e,tivelamended t3e ,omplaint. ?t is not a ,omplete +:mended Complaint2 t3at ,omplies 4it3 Jule 15 o/ t3e Federal Jules o/ Civil =ro,edure" despite plainti// 3avin6 been repeatedl- advised in ot3er ,ases t3at 3e too must ,ompl- 4it3 /ederal and lo,al rules. ?t does not in,lude t3e alle6ations and in/ormation /rom t3e ori6inal ,omplaint" or even t3e ,omplete" ori6inal ,aption" but simpl- 3as t3is 5ud6e@s name added" alon6 4it3 >ud6e 9erren,e H@Drien@s" in its ,aption. 93e bod- o/ t3is pleadin6 is alle6ed to be Ninnell@s +a//idavit"2 and ,ontains spurious and mali,ious alle6ations re6ardin6 t3e undersi6ned 5ud6e and ,on,lusor- alle6ations re6ardin6 rulin6s in Ninnell@s ,ases.LLMoreover" it ,ontains no le!iti6ate /a,tual *asis /or s$in! t3e undersi6ned H$d!e FB3. FB3. ?nstead" plainti//@s ,laim a6ainst t3e undersi6ned is based upon va6ue and ,on,lusor- alle6ations t3at t3is 5ud6e 3as en6a6ed in a ,onspira,- 4it3 prison o//i,ials" ,ourt ,lerks" ot3er distri,t ,ourt 5ud6es" a $upreme Court >usti,e" and t3e 9ent3 Cir,uit Court o/ :ppeals to den- 3im relie/ in 3is ,ases b- appli,ation o/ 2( #.$.C. M 1915)6*. :s plainti// 3as been repeatedlin/ormed" 5ud6es are absolutel- immune /rom liabilit- /or dama6es and ot3er relie/ /or a,ts per/ormed in t3eir 5udi,ial ,apa,ities and 4it3in t3eir 5urisdi,tion. )tu!p v. )park!an% 435 #.$. 349" 35%&5' )19'(*. Ninnell@s bald alle6ations t3at t3is 5ud6e is ra,ist and la,ked 5urisdi,tion are ,ompleteldevoid o/ an- /a,tual basis. Ninnell 3as 3ad an ade0uate remed- at la4 available /or ,3allen6in6 t3is 5ud6e@s de,isions" t3at o/ an appeal. )ee Mireles v. Waco% 502 # .$. 9 )1991*. ven assumin6 !o,ument 5 served to add t3e undersi6ned 5ud6e as a de/endant" t3e ,ourt /inds plainti//@s Motion to Je,use s3ould be denied. 93e ,ourt is /ull,o6niIant t3at 2( #.$.C. M 455)b*)5*)i* re0uires a 5ud6e to re,use 3imsel/ /rom an a,tion to 43i,3 3e is a part-. )ee e.g. @oung v. (nited )tates% 2009 WL %240'% )10t3 Cir. Mar. 12" 2009*. Bevert3eless" t3e ,ourt /inds t3at t3is ,ase involves eA,eptional ,ir,umstan,es" 43i,3 render re,usal in5udi,ious. 93e undersi6ned 5ud6e

4as not named as de/endant in t3e ori6inal ,omplaint" even t3ou63 t4o ot3er 5ud6es in t3is distri,t 4ere so named FB4. 93us" at t3e time t3is matter 4as assi6ned" t3e undersi6ned 5ud6e 4as not a part-. He 4as added as a de/endant onl- a/ter plainti// be,ame a4are o/ t3at assi6nment b- t3e /ilin6 o/ t3e initial and un/avorable s,reenin6 order 3erein. ?n ot3er ,ases" plainti// 3as developed t3e plain and /re0uent pra,ti,e o/ attemptin6 to name t3e 5ud6e 3earin6 3is ,ase as a de/endant FB5. 93e e//e,t o/ plainti// namin6 t3e 5ud6e 3earin6 3is ,ase as a de/endant is t3e obstru,tion o/ t3e orderl- pro,essin6 o/ t3is a,tion. FB4. 93e ot3er distri,t 5ud6e to 43om pro se ,ases are normall- assi6ned /or initial s,reenin6 4as named as a de/endant in t3e ori6inal ,omplaint" and /or t3at reason t3is ,ase 4as assi6ned to t3e undersi6ned 5ud6e. FB5. =lainti// 3as also /iled repetitive motions to re,use based upon prior rulin6s b- ot3er 5ud6es" and 3as /iled numerous 5udi,ial ,omplaints a6ainst 5ud6es 3earin6 3is ,ases. /2 ?n t3e bod- o/ !o,ument 5" plainti// notes 3e is ,3allen6in6 M 1915)6* as un,onstitutional in t3is a,tion" and ar6ues t3at t3is 5ud6e must re,use 3imsel/ be,ause 3e +used 1915)6*2 in t3is ,ase +/raudulentl-2 and 4it3out aut3oriIation. =lainti// ar6ues in ot3er pendin6 pleadin6s t3at a 5ud6e ,annot dismiss a ,ivil ,omplaint ,3allen6in6 M 1915)6* as un,onstitutional" b- appl-in6 t3e t3ree&strikes provisions o/ M 1915)6*. He also intimates t3at 3is ,omplaint is aimed at all 5ud6es ever-43ere 43o en/or,e 2( #.$.C. M 1915)6*. 93us" it is 0uite ,lear t3at Mr. Ninnell 4ould simpl- add as a de/endant an- ot3er 5ud6e assi6ned to t3is ,ase" 43o 4ould undoubtedl- re0uire 3is ,omplian,e 4it3 M 1915)6*. ?n /a,t" in t3e ,aptions on t3e last t4o do,uments /iled b- plainti// )!o,. 13" 14* 3e 3as in,luded +:ll !istri,t Court >ud6es2 and +:ll 9ent3 Cir,uit Court >ud6es.2 Civen t3ese unusual ,ir,umstan,es" t3ere are sound le6al reasons to denplainti//@s Motion to Je,use. Man- o/ t3ose reasons 4ere set /ort3 in a re,ent o/ opinion b- >ud6e Weins3ienk in Akers v. Weinshienk% 2009 WL 11494(0 )!.Colo. :pr. 24" 2009*. =ertinent eA,erpts /rom t3is 4ell&reasoned and ampl-&supported opinion /ollo4. =ursuant to M 455" ... +t3e test is 43et3er a reasonable person" kno4in6 all t3e relevant /a,ts" 4ould 3arbor doubts about t3e 5ud6e@s impartialit-2.... =lainti//@s motion is premised on t3e /a,t t3at t3e undersi6ned distri,t 5ud6e is a named !e/endant in t3is a,tion. =ursuant to M 455)b*)5*)i*" a 5ud6e s3all dis0uali/- 3ersel/ 43en t3e 5ud6e +;i<s a part- to t3e pro,eedin6.2 Ho4ever" t3e #nited $tates Court o/ :ppeals /or t3e 9ent3 Cir,uit lon6 3as 3eld t3at +;a< 5ud6e is not dis0uali/ied merel- be,ause a liti6ant sues or t3reatens to sue 3im.2 (nited )tates v. "ris!ore% 5%4 F.2d 929" 933 )10t3 Cir.19''* )cert. denied% 435 #.$. 954 )19'(**. 93is rule is ,onsistent 4it3 t3e 4ell&establis3ed prin,iple t3at t3e re,usal rules are meant to be sel/&en/or,ed b- t3e 5ud6e. )ee Liteky v. (nited )tates% 510 #.$. 540" 54( )1994*. 93e rule also is ,onsistent 4it3 t3e 9ent3 Cir,uit@s mandate t3at +t3ere is as mu,3 obli6ation /or a 5ud6e not to re,use 43en t3ere is no o,,asion /or 3im to do so as t3ere is /or 3im to do so 43en t3ere is.2 (nited )tates v. ?urger% 9%4 F.2d 10%5" 10'0 )10t3 Cir.1992*),itin6 *in!an v. Bogers% (31 F.2d 93'" 939 )10t3 Cir.19('* )per ,uriam**. Ht3er ,ourts 3ave eAplained /urt3er t3e 5usti/i,ation /or non&mandator- re,usal in t3e situation 43en t3e 5udi,ial o//i,er 3as been named as a part-. ?n #a!6urro v. City o' East Providence% ;9(1 F.2d 1245 )1st Cir. !e,. 1(" 1992" 9able* )per ,uriam* <" t3e plainti// sou63t re,usal o/ t3e presidin6 5ud6e based on 3is assertion t3at t3e 5ud6e 4as an unnamed +>o3n !oe2 de/endant. 93e First Cir,uit 3eld t3at t3e plainti//@s alle6ations 4ere +too nebulous to render ;t3e 5ud6e< a .part-1 /or t3e

purposes o/ M 455.2 Id. at L1. Ho4ever" t3e opinion 4ent /urt3er" statin6 t3atF /3 re,usal 4ould not 3ave been mandator- under M 455)b* even i/ ;t3e 5ud6e< 3ad been a named de/endant. ?n order to 6uard a6ainst +5ud6e&s3oppin6"2 +,ourts 3ave re/used to dis0uali/- t3emselves under $e,tion 455)b*)5*)i* LLunless t3ere is a le!iti6ate *asis /or s$in! t3e H$d!e.2 Anderson v. BosCkowski% %(1 F.$upp. 12(4" 12(9 )B.!.???.19((*" a''Gd% (94 F.2d 133( )'t3 Cir.1990* )table*7 see also% e.g.% (nited )tates v. Pryor% 9%0 F.2d 1" 3 )1st Cir.1992*) ... +?t ,annot be t3at an automati, re,usal ,an be obtained b- t3e simple a,t o/ suin6 t3e 5ud6e.2*7 (nited )tates v. )tudley% '(3 F.2d 934" 940 )9t3 Cir.19(%* )+: 5ud6e is not dis0uali/ied b- a liti6ant@s suit or t3reatened suit a6ainst 3im2*7 (nited )tates v. "ris!ore% 5%4 F.2d 929" 933 )10t3 Cir.19''* )same*7 see also In re Murphy% 59( F.$upp.2d 121" 124 )!.Me.2009*),itin6 #a!6urro /or t3e re,usal standard in t3e First Cir,uit*. : distri,t ,ourt de,ision /rom t3e Western !istri,t o/ Be4 Kork provides additional anal-sis /or 43- re,usal is not mandator- under M 455)b*)5*)i*. )ee Jones v. City o' ?u''alo% (%' F.$upp. 1155 )W.!.B.K.1994*. ?n Jones% t3e 5ud6e 3ad entered an un/avorable de,ision a6ainst t3e plainti//. 93e plainti// apparentl- de,ided t3at t3is un/avorable de,ision indi,ated t3e 5ud6e +too 4as part o/ t3e elaborate .,onspira,-1 t3at 3e 3as alle6ed2 and desired to add t3e 5ud6e to t3e ,omplaint. Id. at 11%3. Con,urrent 4it3 t3is re0uest" t3e plainti// moved /or re,usal o/ t3e 5ud6e under M 455. 93e 5ud6e denied t3e re,usal re0uest" reasonin6 as /ollo4sF ?n m- vie4" t3is ta,ti, o/ suin6 /ederal 5ud6es and t3en seekin6 t3eir dis0uali/i,ation is not3in6 more t3an a ta,ti, to dela- and /rustrate t3e orderladministration o/ 5usti,e. >ud6es s3ould not be 3eld 3osta6e to t3is kind o/ ta,ti, and automati,all- re,use t3emselves simpl- be,ause t3e- or t3eir /ello4 5ud6es on t3e ,ourt are named de/endants in a trul- meritless la4suit.... ;$e,tion 455< 3as been repeatedl- ,onstrued b- t3e ,ourts as not re0uirin6 automati, dis0uali/i,ation o/ a 5ud6e in ,ir,umstan,es su,3 as t3is.... Ht3er4ise" M 455 ,ould be used as a ve3i,le to en6a6e in 5ud6e&s3oppin6" and to +manipulate t3e identit- o/ t3e de,ision maker.2 9o let su,3 a motion su,,eed LLabsent a le6all- su//i,ient basis 4ould allo4 an- liti6ant to t34art t3e le6al pro,ess bmerel- /ilin6 a ,omplaint a6ainst t3e 5ud6e 3earin6 t3e ,ase.... Id. Finall-" =ottingha! v. Acting Judges o' Aist. Court% Bo. 1F0%&C8&115&!FH8$$" 200% WL 1042'%1 )$.!.?nd. Mar. 24" 200%*" is similar to t3e situation o/ten en,ountered in t3e pro se ,onteAt" in 43i,3 a 5ud6e is sued based on orders entered in a prior ,ase. 93e plainti// in =ottingha! sued all 5ud6es in t3e distri,t" 43i,3 in,luded t3e 5ud6e 3andlin6 t3e ,ase. >ud6e Hamilton /ound +;t<3e nearl- in,o3erent ,omplaint s3o4s ,learl- onl- t3at ;t3e plainti//< is /rustrated b- t3e results o/ ot3er la4suits and en,ounters 4it3 t3e state and /ederal ,ourts.2 Id. at L1. 93e order ,ontinuesF /4 93e ,omplaint /ollo4s a pattern t3at is" un/ortunatel-" not rare. : part- 43o is /rustrated 4it3 t3e le6al s-stem laun,3es an endless series o/ unsu,,ess/ul la4suits. a,3 su,,eedin6 la4suit ,omplains about t3e result o/ t3e prior ones and names as de/endants an-one 43o 4as involved in an- 4a- 4it3 t3e prior la4suits" in,ludin6 t3e la4-ers and t3e 5ud6es.... >ud6es need not indul6e t3is pattern bautomati,all- dis0uali/-in6 t3emselves ever- time t3eir names appear in a ,ase ,aption or a ,omplaint. Id. =ottingha! dis,ussed and a6reed 4it3 t3e reasonin6 in Jones and "ris!ore in den-in6 t3e motion to re,use.

Id. 93is ,ourt a6rees 4it3 t3e above reasonin6 and applies it to t3e ,ir,umstan,es o/ t3is ,ase. 93e ,ourt /inds t3at plainti//@s Motion to Je,use )!o,. 5* is made di//i,ult b3is 0uestionable amendment to add t3e undersi6ned 5ud6e as de/endant /ollo4in6 an un/avorable rulin6" and t3at neit3er t3e amendment nor t3e motion is made in 6ood /ait3. LL93e motion is mainl- based upon va6ue and ,on,lusor- 6rounds t3at are ,ompletel- inade0uate. ?t is 4ell&settled t3at a plainti//@s disa6reement 4it3 t3e ,ourt@s prior rulin6s is not a proper basis /or re,usal FB%. Furt3ermore" plainti//@s su66estion t3at neit3er t3e undersi6ned nor an- ot3er 5ud6e ma- 3ear 3is ,ase t3at 4ill appl- M 1915)6*" is utterl- /rivolous. $e,tion 1915)6* is a /ederal la4 distri,t ,ourt 5ud6es are bound to appl-" and its validit- 3as been up3eld despite numerous ,onstitutional ,3allen6es. =lainti// ma- not +oust2 t3e 5ud6e 3earin6 3is ,ase b- simpl- addin6 t3e 5ud6e@s name to t3e ,ase ,aption and /ilin6 a ,on,lusora//idavit o/ pre5udi,e based mainl- on 5udi,ial rulin6s. 93e ,ourt t3us ,on,ludes t3at its impartialit- in t3is a,tion 4ould not reasonabl- be 0uestioned based upon plainti//@s alle6ations" and t3ere/ore plainti//@s Motion to Je,use must be denied. 93e ,ourt emp3asiIes t3at t3is ,ase involves eA,eptional ,ir,umstan,es" and t3at under normal ,ir,umstan,es t3e undersi6ned 5ud6e 4ould re,use 3imsel/ /rom a ,ase in 43i,3 3e is properl- named a part-. FB%. 93e /a,t t3at a 5ud6e 3as previousl- rendered a de,ision a6ainst a partis not su//i,ient to s3o4 bias or pre5udi,e. (.). v. Irwin% 5%1 F.2d 19(" 200 )10t3 Cir.19''*" cert. denied% 434 #.$. 1012 )19'(*7 (.). v. "oeltC% 513 F.2d 193" 19( )10t3 Cir.19'5*" cert. denied% 423 #.$. (30 )19'5*. 93e ,ourt notes t3at plainti//@s ,3allen6es to M 1915)6* are t3e underl-in6 basis /or t3is ,omplaint alle6in6 ,ivil ri63ts violations. $in,e t3ese ,3allen6es su66est no imminent dan6er o/ p3-si,al 3arm" t3e ,ourt properl- 3eld t3at plainti// ma- not pro,eed on t3ese ,3allen6es unless 3e pa-s t3e /ull /ilin6 /ee in advan,e. 93e ,ourt /urt3er /inds t3at t3e merits o/ plainti//@s ,3allen6es to M 1915)6* are irrelevant to a determination 43et3er t3is a,tion ma- be dismissed /or /ailure to pa- t3e /ilin6 /ee. )ee ?ishop v. )argent Aischner% 1% Fed.:ppA. (91" L L 2 )10t3 Cir.2001*" cert. denied% 534 #.$. 10(% )2002*. Bone o/ t3e materials /iled b- plainti// bears upon 3is statutor- obli6ation to pa- t3e /ull distri,t ,ourt /ilin6 /ee. =lainti//@s ,3allen6es to M 1915)6* are also ,onsidered as 3is ob5e,tions to t3e ,ourt@s denial o/ 3is motion to =ro,eed 4it3out prepa-ment o/ /ees. 93e ,ourt /inds t3at plainti//@s ,3allen6es to M 1915)6* 3ave eit3er been previousl- re5e,ted or are ,ompletel- /rivolous. )ee e. 6." White v. )tate o' Colorado% 15' F.3d 122% )10t3 Cir.199(*7 >innell v. Clinton% 2009 WL 9509(0 )!.Nan ." :pr. '" 2009*. :mon6 t3e /rivolous are 3is repetitive assertions t3at M 1915)6* amounts to a bill o/ attainder. )ee =i:on v. Ad!inistrator o' "eneral )ervices% 433 #.$. 425" 4%(&%9" 4'1 FB32 )19''*.FB' ?n addition" M 1915)6* is not eA post /a,to" t-ranni,al le6islation dire,ted at a suspe,t ,lass" or based upon an irrational or impermissible ,lassi/i,ation. $e,tion 1915)6* is not tar6eted at all pro se prisoner liti6ants" as plainti// asserts. 93e vast ma5orit- o/ pro se prisoner liti6ants ,ontinues to en5ot3e privile6e o/ pro,eedin6 4it3out prepa-ment o/ /ees. Jat3er" M 1915)6* is eApressl- aimed onl- at a small subset o/ pro se prisoner liti6ants" starklrepresented b- Mr. Ninnell" 43o 3ave repeatedl- abused 5udi,ial pro,ess and t3ere/ore /or/eited t3e privile6e to pro,eed 4it3out prepa-in6 t3e /ull /ilin6 /ee. FB'. ?n =i:on% t3e $upreme Court eAplained t3at a +Dill o/ :ttainder is a la4 t3at le6islativel- determines 6uilt and in/li,ts punis3ment upon an identi/iable individual 4it3out provision o/ t3e prote,tions o/ a 5udi,ial trial2 43i,3 +surel- 4as not intended to serve as a variant o/ t3e e0ual

prote,tion do,trine" invalidatin6 ever- :,t o/ Con6ress ... t3at le6islativelburdens some persons or 6roups but not all ot3er plausible individuals.2 93e Court /urt3er eAplained t3at t3e +/a,t t3at 3arm is in/li,ted b- 6overnmental aut3orit- does not make it punis3ment.2 Id. Clearl-" appli,ation o/ M 1915)6* to t3e appli,able 6roup does not amount to punis3ment 4it3out trial. /2 Furt3ermore" t3e ,ourt ,erti/ies t3at an- appeal o/ t3is order /iled b- Mr. Ninnell t3at is submitted 4it3out prepa-ment o/ t3e /ull appellate /ilin6 /ee is not taken +in 6ood /ait32 pursuant to 2( #.$.C. M 1915)a*)3*. )ee Coppedge v. (nited )tates% 3%9 #.$. 43(" 445 )19%2*. I? IS ?#E:E74:E 4:-E:E- t3at t3is a,tion is dismissed and all relie/ is denied" 4it3out pre5udi,e" due to plainti//@s /ailure to pa- t3e /ilin6 /ee. I? IS 7U:?#E: 4:-E:E- t3at all plainti//@s pendin6 motions )!o,s. 5" '" 9" 10" 12" 13" and 14* are denied as moot" and 3is Motion to Je,use t3e #ndersi6ned >ud6e )!o,. 5* is denied. Sne!irev v. Sed8ic5, 401 7.S$...2d 10,3 %-.(las5a,Jan 02, 2006) &ac5!ro$ndD Follo4in6 plainti//@s ,onvi,tion on /ederal dru6 ,3ar6es" 3e brou63t ?ivens a,tion a6ainst t4o !istri,t Court 5ud6es involved in 3is ,onvi,tion and 3is subse0uent petition /or 3abeas ,orpus relie/" and in a related ,ivil pro,eedin6. #oldin!D 93e !istri,t Court" $in6leton" >." 3eld t3at Court la,ked sub5e,t matter 5urisdi,tion. !ismissed. West Headnotes ;1< J$d!es 221 4,%1)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k49 Dias and =re5udi,e 22'k49)1* k. ?n 6eneral. Most Cited Cases !istri,t 5ud6e 4ould not re,use 3imsel/ in a ?ivens a,tion brou63t a6ainst t4o 5ud6es involved in plainti//@s ,riminal ,onvi,tion and subse0uent petition /or 4rit o/ 3abeas ,orpus" even t3ou63 5ud6e 4as a named de/endant in t3e a,tion" LLuntil 5ud6e 3ad determined 43et3er a,tion 4as so /rivolous as to de/eat sub5e,t matter 5urisdi,tion prior to an- determination o/ 43et3er re,usal 4ould be appropriate. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455. ;2< 7ederal Co$rts 110& 30

1'0D Federal Courts 1'0D? >urisdi,tion and =o4ers in Ceneral 1'0D?):* ?n Ceneral 1'0Dk29 Hb5e,tions to >urisdi,tion" !etermination and Waiver 1'0Dk30 k. =o4er and dut- o/ ,ourt. Most Cited Cases !istri,t Court 3as a dut- to determine 43et3er it 3as sub5e,t matter 5urisdi,tion be/ore pro,eedin6 in an- ,ase. ;3< 7ederal Co$rts 110& 3.1

1'0D Federal Courts 1'0D? >urisdi,tion and =o4ers in Ceneral 1'0D?):* ?n Ceneral 1'0Dk3 >urisdi,tion in Ceneral7 Bature and $our,e 1'0Dk3.1 k. ?n 6eneral. Most Cited Cases ?/ ,laims are 43oll- /rivolous" distri,t ,ourts la,k sub5e,t matter 5urisdi,tion to ,onsider t3em. ;4< 7ederal Civil +roced$re 110( 621.2%1)

1'0: Federal Civil =ro,edure 1'0:8?? =leadin6s and Motions 1'0:8??):* =leadin6s in Ceneral 1'0:k%54 Constru,tion 1'0:k%5'.5 =ro $e or La- =leadin6s 1'0:k%5'.5)1* k. ?n 6eneral. Most Cited Cases W3ere a pleadin6 is de/e,tive but ,ould be amended to state a ,laim" an opportunit- must be a//orded t3e pro se plainti// to seek su,3 an amendment. ;2< United States 3,3 20.10%3)

393 #nited $tates 393? Covernment in Ceneral 393k50 Liabilities o/ H//i,ers or :6ents /or Be6li6en,e or Mis,ondu,t 393k50.10 =arti,ular :,ts or Claims 393k50.10)3* k. Criminal la4 en/or,ement and investi6ation7 prisoners@ ,laims. Most Cited Cases )Formerl- 22'k3%* !istri,t Court la,ked sub5e,t matter 5urisdi,tion in a ?ivens a,tion a6ainst t4o 5ud6es" based on t3eir adverse rulin6s in plainti//@s ,riminal ,onvi,tion and subse0uent petition /or 4rit o/ 3abeas ,orpus7 a,tion 4as /rivolous inasmu,3 as 5ud6es 4ere entitled to absolute 5udi,ial immunit-. ;6< United States 3,3 20.10%1)

393 #nited $tates 393? Covernment in Ceneral 393k50 Liabilities o/ H//i,ers or :6ents /or Be6li6en,e or Mis,ondu,t 393k50.10 =arti,ular :,ts or Claims 393k50.10)1* k. ?n 6eneral. Most Cited Cases )Formerl- 22'k3%* >ud6es en5o- absolute immunit- /rom ?ivens suits /or t3eir rulin6s" even i/ t3ose rulin6s are ,learl- erroneous and mali,iousl- motivated.

?s t3ere la,k o/ sub5e,t matter 5urisdi,tion o/ 5ud6e be,ause o/ 3avin6 a sto,k in part-O
LL5% :LJ 5t3 '(3" !is0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e Dased on =ropert-&H4ners3ip ?nterest in Liti6ation W3i,3 Consists o/ More 93an Mere H4ners3ip o/ $to,k&&$tate Cases. LL%5 :LJ 4t3 '3" !is0uali/i,ation o/ >ud6e De,ause o/ =oliti,al :sso,iation or

Jelation to :ttorne- in Case.

LL50 :LJ 2nd 143" Jelations3ip to :ttorne- as !is0uali/-in6 >ud6e. LL9% :LJ 54%" Ji63t o/ >ud6e Bot Le6all- !is0uali/ied to !e,line to :,t in Le6al =ro,eedin6 #pon =ersonal Crounds. LL:m. >ur. 2d Federal Courts M '1" >ud6e@s Former mplo-ment. From 5ud6es]dis0]to]a,t]a,tin6]as],ounsel]or]ot3er]parti,ipation]in],ause]in]6eneral]/ ed]all]di6est.do, Ne-4ords dis0uali/i,ation o/ /ederal 5ud6e /or bein6 ,ounsel" attorne-" la4-er to a part-7 t3e eAisten,e o/ an attorne-&,lient relations3ip" 3ad represented a part-. mplo-ed as an attorne- /or partLL ;Cited 1% times /or t3is le6al issue< Litek- v. #.$." 114 $.Ct. 114' #.$.Ca."1994 Je0uired 5udi,ial re,usal /or bias did not eAist in n6land at t3e time o/ Dla,kstone but" sin,e 1'92" /ederal statutes 3ave ,ompelled distri,t 5ud6es to re,use t3emselves 43en t3e- 3ave an interest in suit or 3ave been ,ounsel to a part-. 2( #.$.C.:. MM 144 " 455)a* 7 :,t Ma- (" 1'92" M 11" 1 $tat. 2'57 :,t Mar,3 3" 1(21" 3 $tat. %43. Lite53 v. U.S., 210 U.S. 240, 244, 114 S.Ct. 1141, 121 L.Ed.2d 414, 62 USL 4161 %U.S.9a. Mar 01, 1,,4) LL$in,e 1'92" /ederal statutes 3ave ,ompelled distri,t 5ud6es to re,use t3emselves 43en t3e- 3ave an interest in t3e suit" or 3ave been LL,ounsel to a part-.

#.$. v. Ma3er" (( F.$upp. 100'" 100(" )!.Me." Feb 14" 1950* ;1< J$d!es 221 41%1)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k4' :,tin6 as Counsel or Ht3er =arti,ipation in Cause 22'k4')1* k. ?n Ceneral. Most Cited Cases $tatute re0uirin6 /ederal 5ud6e to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ in an- ,ase in 43i,3 3e 3as been o/ ,ounsel ,ompels a distri,t 5ud6e to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ 43enever 3e 3as been o/ ,ounsel /or eit3er part- in t3e ,ase be/ore 3im. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455. 9itle 2( #.$.C.:. M 455" ,ompels a 5ud6e o/ a #nited $tates !istri,t Court to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ 43enever 3e 3as been o/ ,ounsel /or eit3er part- in t3e ,ase be/ore 3im" !is,losure statement under t3e aut3oriIation o/

Lo,al Civil Jule 1.9 identi/i,ation o/ an- ,orporate or ot3er parents" subsidiaries" or a//iliates o/ t3at part-" se,urities or ot3er interests in 43i,3 are publi,l- 3eld #.$. v. Ma3er" (( F.$upp. 100'" 100'" )!.Me. Feb 14" 1950* ;1< J$d!es 221 41%1)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k4' :,tin6 as Counsel or Ht3er =arti,ipation in Cause 22'k4')1* k. ?n Ceneral. Most Cited Cases LL$tatute re0uirin6 /ederal 5ud6e to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ in an- ,ase in 43i,3 3e 3as been o/ ,ounsel ,ompels a distri,t 5ud6e to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ 43enever 3e 3as been o/ ,ounsel /or eit3er part- in t3e ,ase be/ore 3im. 2( #.$.C.:. M 455. ;2< J$d!es 221 41%1)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k4' :,tin6 as Counsel or Ht3er =arti,ipation in Cause 22'k4')1* k. ?n Ceneral. Most Cited Cases : #nited $tates attorne- is +o/ ,ounsel2 /or t3e #nited $tates in all ,riminal ,ases in 3is distri,t" 4it3in statute re0uirin6 a /ederal 5ud6e to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ in an- ,ase in 43i,3 3e 3as been +o/ ,ounsel2. 2( #.$.C.:. MM 455" 50'. ;3< J$d!es 221 41%1)

22' >ud6es 22'?8 !is0uali/i,ation to :,t 22'k4' :,tin6 as Counsel or Ht3er =arti,ipation in Cause 22'k4')1* k. ?n Ceneral. Most Cited Cases #nder statute re0uirin6 /ederal 5ud6e to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ in an- ,ase in 43i,3 3e 3as been o/ ,ounsel" /ederal 5ud6e 43o 3ad been #nited $tates attorneat time de/endant 4as ,onvi,ted and senten,ed 4ould dis0uali/- 3imsel/ /rom passin6 on motion to va,ate and set aside 5ud6ment not4it3standin6 t3at t3e de/endant 3ad 4aived prose,ution b- indi,tment and pleaded 6uilt- to an in/ormation and t3at t3e 5ud6e as #nited $tates attorne- 3ad taken no a,tive part in t3e pro,eedin6s. 2( #.$.C.:. MM 455" 50'. Hn Bovember 2%" 194%" t3e de/endant" Ma3er" 4as /ound to 3ave violated t3e ,onditions o/ probation imposed as a result o/ a previous ,onvi,tion in Criminal

Bo. 42937 and it 4as ordered t3at t3e ori6inal senten,e o/ t3ree -ears" imposed >une 19" 1945" be eAe,uted and t3at de/endant stand ,ommitted in eAe,ution o/ senten,e. 93is senten,e 3as been served b- de/endant. Hn t3e same da-" de/endant a/ter bein6 advised o/ 3is ri63ts" si6ned a 4aiver o/ prose,ution b- indi,tment and ,onsent to pro,eed b- in/ormation" in Criminal Bo. 4395. !e/endant 4as arrai6ned on Bovember 2%" 194%" entered a plea o/ .Cuilt-1 to t3e o//enses ,3ar6ed in t3e in/ormation" /1008 and 4as senten,ed to imprisonment /or a term o/ t4o -ears" said senten,e to be6in at t3e eApiration o/ t3e senten,e o/ t3ree -ears ordered eAe,uted t3at da- in Criminal Bo. 4293. !e/endant@s motion to va,ate is in ,onne,tion 4it3 t3e t4o&-ear senten,e imposed in Criminal Bo. 4395" 43i,3 senten,e t3e de/endant is no4 servin6. 93e present issue is 43et3er t3e 5ud6e o/ t3is ,ourt s3ould be dis0uali/ied /rom a,tin6 upon t3e motion to va,ate 5ud6ment" due to t3e /a,t t3at 3e 4as t3e #nited $tates :ttorne- /or t3e !istri,t o/ Maine 43en t3e de/endant 4as ,onvi,ted and senten,ed. 9itle 2( #.$.C.:. M 50'" provides t3atF . A,ept as ot3er4ise provided b- la4" it s3all be t3e dut- o/ ea,3 #nited $tates attorne-" 4it3in 3is distri,t" to prose,ute /or all o//enses a6ainst t3e #nited $tates L L L 1. $e,tion 455 o/ 9itle 2( #.$.C.:. provides t3atF .:n- 5usti,e or 5ud6e o/ t3e #nited $tates s3all dis0uali/- 3imsel/ in an- ,ase in 43i,3 3e 3as a substantial interest" 3as been o/ ,ounsel" is or 3as been a material 4itness" or is so related to or ,onne,ted 4it3 an- part- or 3is attorne- as to render it improper" in 3is opinion" /or 3im to sit on t3e trial" appeal" or ot3er pro,eedin6 t3erein.1 $in,e de/endant 4aived prose,ution b- indi,tment in Criminal Bo. 4395" and pleaded 6uilt- to an in/ormation" t3is ,ourt took no a,tive part in t3e pro,eedin6s" eA,ept per3aps as #nited $tates :ttorne- 3e ma- 3ave si6ned t3e in/ormation and moved /or arrai6nment and senten,e o/ de/endant. Ho4ever" alt3ou63 t3is ,ourt /eels it ,ould a,t /airl- and impartiall- to t3e de/endant" it is o/ t3e opinion t3at 9itle 2( #.$.C.:. M 455" ,ompels a 5ud6e o/ a #nited $tates !istri,t Court to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ 43enever 3e 3as been o/ ,ounsel /or eit3er part- in t3e ,ase be/ore 3im" and t3at 9itle 2( #.$.C.:. M 50'" leaves no doubt t3at a #nited $tates :ttorne- is .o/ ,ounsel1 /or t3e #nited $tates in all ,riminal ,ases in 3is distri,t. $ee #nited $tates v. 8asili,k" 3 Cir." 194'" 1%0 F.2d %31. ?n #nited $tates v 8asili,k )194'" C:3 =a* 1%0 F2d %31" t3e ,ourt stated t3at M 20 o/ t3e >udi,ial Code ,ompelled a 5ud6e o/ a !istri,t Court o/ t3e #nited $tates to dis0uali/- 3imsel/ 43enever 3e 3ad been o/ ,ounsel /or eit3er part- in

t3e ,ase be/ore 3im7 t3at t3e 5ud6e@s dis0uali/i,ation in su,3 ,ir,umstan,es 4as not a matter /or t3e eAer,ise o/ 3is o4n dis,retion but 4as un,onditional and absolute.;2<
Hale v. Firestone 9ire U Jubber Co." '5% F.2d 1322" 1 Fed.J.$erv.3d 1%02" 1' Fed. J. vid. $erv. 92( )(t3 Cir.)Mo.*" Mar 13" 19(5*

Maier v. Hrr" '5( F.2d 15'( )Fed.Cir.)Ha4ai@i*"Mar 2%" 19(5* Loss o/ a loan in a mort6a6e ba,ked se,urit-" 4ould ,ause loss o/ a repa-ment stream /rom t3e mort6a6e loans. :nd redu,e t3e pa-ments made to t3e pensioner annuitant or result in t3e loss o/ re,eivin6 t3e pa-ments. LLFirst :llian,e t3en 4ould issue se,urities to investors t3at 4ere ba,ked b- t3e repa-ment streams /rom t3e mort6a6e loans.' 93e borro4ers stream o/ pa-ments 93e ,erti/i,ates t-pi,all- 6ive t3e ,erti/i,ate3older a ri63t to a portion o/ t3e prin,ipal and interest pa-ments re,eived /rom t3e borro4ers 43o make pa-ments into t3e trust.% 93us" t3e ratin6 /or t3at 3i63est rated sli,e o/ t3e ,erti/i,ates takes into a,,ount t3e likeli3ood t3at t3e borro4er 4ill de/ault" as 4ell as t3e likeli3ood t3at t3e insurer 4ill de/ault De,ause t3e loans t3at ,onstitute t3e assets o/ t3e trust ?n t3eor- at least" ,redit risk insuran,e poli,ies prote,t mort6a6e industrparti,ipants a6ainst losses 43en numerous borro4ers de/ault or 43en lenders re/use to bu- ba,k de/aulted loans under a repur,3ase a6reement2* ),itations omitted*7 Nennet3 C. Lore U Cameron L. Co4an" Mort6a6e&Da,ked $e,uritiesF !evelopments and 9rends in t3e $e,ondar- Mort6a6e Market 9[40 )West Croup 199(* )+?n order to obtain an investment 6rade ratin6 /or a mort6a6e&ba,ked se,uritissue" t3e issuer must demonstrate t3at 3olders o/ t3e se,urit- are prote,ted a6ainst losses arisin6 b- reason o/ mort6a6or de/aults and destru,tion o/ ,ollateral. 93e Mort6a6e Loan =ur,3ase :6reement )ML=:* ,overs t3e sale o/ mort6a6e loans /rom t3e appli,able mort6a6e loan seller to t3e se,uritiIation depositor" 43i,3 4ill trans/er t3e mort6a6e loans to a ne4l- ,reated trust under a =$:. Credit risk insurers likel- 4ill seek 4a-s to avoid t3eir potentiall- enormous losses on t3ese poli,ies. $ome" like t3e ,redit risk insurer dis,ussed above" maassert t3at parti,ular loans 4ere /raudulent and t3us t3e- 3ave no obli6ation to pa- losses resultin6 /rom de/aults on t3e alle6edl- /raudulent loans. Ht3er ,redit risk insurers ma- assert t3at t3e- 4ere de/rauded b- t3eir o4n /inan,ial institution poli,-3olders in ,onne,tion 4it3 ans4ers 6iven and materials dis,losed durin6 t3e insuran,e under4ritin6 pro,ess. ?t is not 3ard to ima6ine a situation in 43i,3 a ,redit risk insurer seeks to res,ind its ,redit risk insuran,e poli,- alto6et3er b- assertin6 t3at it 4as misled b- a /inan,ial institution as to t3e nature or 0ualit- o/ t3e loans underl-in6 a mort6a6e se,uritiIation. Fortunatel- /or poli,-3olders" t3ere are man- 4ell&developed de/enses to an insurer1s attempt to res,ind an insuran,e poli,-. Jes,ission remains dis/avored in t3e la4" and a poli,-3older ,an o/ten prevail de/eat res,ission b- demonstratin6 on ar6uments t3at an insurer 4aived its abilit- to

res,ind an insuran,e poli,- b- t3e insurer1s o4n kno4led6e and ,ondu,t.2* ),itations omitted*. :nd ,ausin6 losses /or insurers t3at ,ause t3em to be,ome insolvent. ?n anot3er s,enario" assume t3e borro4er su,,eeds in liti6ation a6ainst a trust and demonstrates t3at t3e trust ,olle,ted and distributed /unds to 43i,3 it 4as not entitled. 93e trust asset is t3e ri63t to a /uture pa-ment stream based on t3e mort6a6es it 3olds. ?t is unlikel- to 3ave ,as3 on 3and to satis/- a 5ud6ment" and t3e =$: ma- not provide /or su,3 an event. LL9-pi,al 3olders o/ t3ese ,erti/i,ates in,lude banks" insuran,e ,ompanies" mutual /unds" pension /unds" muni,ipalities" 3ed6e /unds" and ot3er 0uali/ied investors.11 93us" t3e traditional ,erti/i,ate3older stru,ture pi,tured in /i6ure 20D 3as t3e individual ,erti/i,ate3older ans4erin6 to its investors" 43et3er t3eare sto,k3olders in t3e ,orporation" bene/i,iaries o/ t3e pension /und" or 3olders o/ t3e mutual /und.12 11 :sset&Da,ked $e,urities" '0 Fed. Je6. at 1511 )+93e predominant pur,3asers o/ asset&ba,ked se,urities toda- are institutional investors" in,ludin6 /inan,ial institutions" pension /unds" insuran,e ,ompanies" mutual /unds and monemana6ers.2*7 Nennet3 C. Lore U Cameron L. Co4an" Mort6a6e&Da,ked $e,urities M 1.3 )93omson&West 200'* )+93e primar- pur,3asers o/ mort6a6e&related produ,ts 4ere initiall- t3e Federal Bational Mort6a6e :sso,iation )+Fannie Mae2*" t3e Federal Home Loan Mort6a6e Corporation )+Freddie Ma,2* and t3ri/t institutions. 9oda-" ,ommer,ial banks" insuran,e ,ompanies" pension /unds" mutual /unds and international institutions" amon6 ot3ers" are a,tive pur,3asers in t3e se,ondarmarket.2*. 12 C'. Nennet3 C. Lore U Cameron L. Co4an" Mort6a6e&Da,ked $e,urities M (.3 )93omson &West 200'* )!is,ussin6 pension /und investments" Lore and Co4an state +;4<3en not ot3er4ise ,ontrolled b- t3e terms o/ a trust a6reement" statute or ,ourt de,ision" most states impose a +prudent person2 standard on /idu,iaries dealin6 4it3 trust assets. #nder t3ese standards" a /idu,iar- )i* ma- not ,ommin6le or spe,ulate 4it3 plan assets7 )ii* must diversi/- t3e assets and provide /or li0uidit- o/ investment7 and )iii* must ,arr- out all duties impartiall- 4it3out re6ard to an- personal bene/it.2*. t3e ,ase o/ MD$" ea,3 mort6a6e loan in su,3 a pool is se,ured b- a mort6a6e or deed o/ trust on spe,i/ied real propert-. Cenerall-" prin,ipal and interest pa-ments on t3e underl-in6 mort6a6e loans are used to pa- prin,ipal and interest on t3e MD$.1