Swift

Swift v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA CLARA CTY.

Good Law
172 Cal. App. 4th 878·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 434·91 Cal. Rptr. 3d 504
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 26, 2009H032755California2,809 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mihara, J.

Petitioners Adam and Megan Swift filed a peremptory challenge pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 seeking to disqualify Judge Socrates Peter Manoukian. Judge Manoukian struck the peremptory challenge on the ground that he had previously “made a determination of contested fact issues relating to the merits.” (See § 170.6, subd. (a)(2).) Because Judge Manoukian’s only factual determinations were made in connection with discovery motions and did not relate to the merits of the case, we conclude that he erred in striking the challenge. We therefore grant the petition for a writ of mandamus directing respondent Santa Clara County Superior Court to vacate the March 21, 2008 order striking the peremptory challenge.

I. Background

Petitioners are plaintiffs and cross-defendants (hereafter plaintiffs) in a civil action involving a landlord-tenant dispute. They allege fraud, breach of contract, and statutory violations, and they seek the return of a security deposit pursuant to the terms of a residential lease. Real parties in interest Kenton and Moira Mitchell are defendants and cross-complainants (hereafter defendants) in the action and allege that plaintiffs…

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.