Jensen

Jensen v. Superior Court

Good Law
154 Cal. App. 3d 533·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 1909·201 Cal. Rptr. 275
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 16, 1984Civ. 31683California2,932 words

Opinion

Opinion

Butler, J.

Attorney J. Kenneth Jensen wears a turban. Judge Jack R. Levitt admits turbanned lawyers to his courtroom upon a showing the turban is worn for religious, cosmetic or other “legitimate” purpose. Jensen refuses to answer Judge Levitt’s questions about his turban and Judge Levitt denies him access to his courtroom. Following a series of confrontations over the years, Jensen challenged Judge Levitt at a hearing on a demurrer, charging him with bias and prejudice because of the “no-turban without explanation” edict.

Judge Levitt transferred the disqualification issue to the presiding judge who set a hearing for January 31, 1984, in his department. Judge Levitt rescheduled the hearing on the demurrer in his department for the following day.

Jensen filed mandamus here (4 Civ. 31566) to require the court to follow the hearing procedures prescribed in Code of Civil Procedure section 170, subdivision (d) requiring the parties to agree upon another judge to hear the disqualification, or failing that, by a judge assigned by the Chief Justice. On being informed the parties would agree upon a judge to hear the disqualification issue and the hearing on the demurrer before Judge…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.