Karlsen

Karlsen v. Superior Court

Good Law
139 Cal. App. 4th 1526·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 810·2006 Daily Journal DAR 6690·43 Cal. Rptr. 3d 738·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4564
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 30, 2006B186446California1,367 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hastings, J.

We issued an alternative writ to address a problem arising from the trial court’s acceptance of a Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 peremptory challenge filed by petitioner after remand from this court directing the trial court to prepare a statement of decision.* We conclude the trial judge erred in accepting the challenge and transferring the matter to a different judge.

FACTS

The underlying action arises out of a commercial transaction between petitioner M. Alfred Karlsen, individually and as a trustee of the M. Alfred Karlsen Professional Corporation Employees’ Retirement Trust, and real party in interest Cannonball Acquisitions, a California corporation (Cannonball). Cannonball prevailed in a court trial and petitioner requested a statement of decision. The court directed that Cannonball’s counsel prepare the requested statement of decision. No statement of decision was prepared. Nevertheless, over objection of petitioner, the court entered judgment in favor of Cannonball.

On petitioner’s appeal, we concluded the judgment had to be reversed and the matter remanded for the trial court to prepare a statement of decision pursuant to section 632 and California…

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.