Blumenthal

Blumenthal v. Superior Court

Bad Law
137 Cal. App. 4th 672·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 330·2006 Daily Journal DAR 2995·40 Cal. Rptr. 3d 509
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 10, 2006G036590California6,792 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sills, J.

I. SUMMARY

In this writ proceeding we hold that the trial judge abused her discretion in declaring a mistrial in a family law case merely because the parties did not complete the long-cause trial of a dissolution prior to an arbitrary deadline set by the trial judge. (The actual trial, in fact, had consumed less than two court days, and there was only one witness left to call and only a few more hours left to go.)

We also hold, since trial was already in progress, that it was “possible” within the meaning of Family Code section 2330.3 for the trial judge, assigned at the time of the trial to a “family law” panel, to have taken the case with her to her subsequent courtroom assignment, and in fact she should have taken it. (As it turned out, her new assignment is literally one courtroom away in the same courthouse and is still denominated a “family law” assignment.) We will therefore grant the petition brought by the wife for a writ of mandate ordering the trial court to vacate the mistrial and set the matter for completion of the trial before this same trial judge.

II. FACTS

Until the beginning of trial in October 2005 the case had proceeded at what can only be…

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.