Q: For the first six months of our case we had a judge who seemed fair. He was suddenly reassigned, and a new judge is handling things. His rulings are really awful. We think he has some prejudice against us. How can we remove him? Are we stuck?

— H.B., Signal Hill

A: Under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 170.6, there is a one-time right to file a peremptory challenge to a judge once you have been given notice that he or she is assigned to the case, but you have to file the form very promptly. It sounds like you are already beyond that time period. Thus, your choice comes down to a challenge for cause, namely that the judge is biased in some improper manner, or otherwise should be removed for good cause. A few basic examples: He or she has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts in the case, or is related to someone who is an attorney for a party, or has a financial interest in the proceeding.

In addition, there are broader categories to try to demonstrate why a judge should be recused. One standard is that a person aware of all the relevant facts could reasonably entertain doubt about the judge’s ability to be impartial. These options are covered under California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 170.1 through 170.5. To be sure, however, it can be daunting to challenge a judge, whether he or she hears the challenge, or someone else decides it. If the challenge is denied, you go back to that same judge.

There are, however, another circumstances under which the judge may be removed from you case: If his or her ruling against you is of a final or particularly significant nature, and reversed on appeal, you may then have good argument to ask that the matter be assigned to someone else thereafter.

Bottom line: It is very hard to “grin and bear it” if you have a judge who is not impartial. My view is that if this occurs,  “trust your instinct,” but absolutely talk it out very carefully with your attorney.

Q: To what extent is a judge supposed to disclose any conflict he or she might have in hearing a case if one of the lawyers is from the firm he used to work at?

— S.D., Westchester

A: Canon 3E(2)(a) of the California Code of Judicial Ethics requires judges in all trial court proceedings to disclose “on the record” any information that is reasonably relevant to the question of disqualification under Code of Civil Procedure Section 170.1. This is required even if the judge believes there is no actual basis for disqualification. One factor on the requirement of disclosure is to seek to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Thus, erring on the side of disclosure seems to be called for.

Judicial complaint

The Commission on Judicial Performance (website www.cjp.ca.gov) is a California state agency charged with investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity, and for disciplining judges. The website has specific sections on the complaint process as well as how to file a complaint. You also can find statistics of interest there as well.

Ron Sokol is a Manhattan Beach attorney with more than 30 years of experience. His column appears on Wednesdays. Email questions and comments to him at RonSEsq@aol.com or write to him at Ask The Lawyer, Daily Breeze, 21250 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 170, Torrance, CA 90503. This column is a summary of the law and not a substitute for legal consultation on any particular case.