CEB DailyNews has published my article, “Courts Cannot Limit Code of Civil Procedure Section 170.6 Challenges By Local Rule, Fourth District Holds.” The article is about the published opinion in *Lorch v. Superior Court* (D4d1 May 16, 2024 No. D083609), about peremptory challenges to a trial judge.
In a “master calendar” court, rather than the usual 10 days, you have to make your challenge before the case is assigned to trial. So to wreak havoc with the right to make 170.6 challenges, the San Diego Superior Court got the bright idea to deem every judge a “master calendar” judge. This sets your 170.6 deadline as “the time the cause is assigned for trial”—and if you’re reassigned for trial, that means pretty much instantaneously.
The plaintiff in Lorch got a voicemail from the clerk just before 3:00 p.m. the Friday before trial, and efiled her 170.6 peremptory challenge on Saturday. But the judge rejected it as untimely. (The judge even jeered at her, "I need to hear from plaintiff's counsel about why they dislike me so much.”)
After a two-day trial completed, the Court of Appeal granted a writ, holding that the San Diego Superior Court’s local rule 2.1.3 is inconsistent with CCP 170.6. “A local court rule may not alter the true meaning of the statute.”