Zilog, Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cty.

Good Law
104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 173·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 90·2001 Daily Journal DAR 1487·86 Cal. App. 4th 1309·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1204
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 7, 2001H021144California5,381 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wunderlich, J.

I. Introduction

In this original proceeding, we consider which statutory time limits are applicable to a Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 peremptory challenge to a judge sitting in a trial court that has attributes of both a direct calendar court and a master calendar court. Resolution of this issue is critical to determining whether the peremptory challenge filed by Zilog, Inc. (Zilog) was properly denied as untimely on the grounds that in a direct calendar court, Government Code section 68616, subdivision (i), requires that the peremptory challenge be filed no later than 15 days after the judge’s assignment or a party’s first appearance. Zilog contends that Government Code section 68616, subdivision (i), is inapplicable, because respondent court is not a direct calendar court, and therefore its peremptory challenge was timely filed within the applicable time limit set forth in section 170.6, subdivision (2). Zilog also contends that an order the trial court made regarding a summary adjudication motion is void because the trial court made the order after improperly denying the peremptory challenge. We agree with Zilog’s contentions. Accordingly, we will issue a…

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.