No. 23-7188

Jacob Winding, et ux. v. Superior Court of California, San Joaquin County, et al.

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2024-04-09
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: civil-procedure due-process equal-protection judicial-bias judicial-disqualification procedural-safeguards recusal-standards standing verified-statement
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2024-06-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is a verified statement of disqualification required to meet the standards applied to a motion or Is a verified statement of disqualification a statement of facts which is supported by concrete evidence efficient to show cause?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED . If a judge files and order Striking Petitioners verified statement of Disqualification under CCP section 170.3 but in the same moving order files and answer is the document / order govern by CCP section 170.3(c )(5) which in summation states once — a judge provides an answer and refuses to recuse himself/ herself another judge is to hear and determine the matter of disqualification and thus also invoke CCP 170.3 (c )(6) in summation states that a judge cannot rule upon his own disqualification proceedings? : Is a verified statement of disqualification required to meet the standards applied to a motion or Is a verified statement of disqualification a statement of facts which is supported by concrete evidence efficient to show cause? Is ruling upon your own Judicial Officer disqualification a violation of equal protection of the law and a failure to provide a person due process of law when the Judicial Officer actually committed tangible and evident bias against a party before there court? \ i

Docket Entries

2024-06-10
Petition DENIED.
2024-05-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/6/2024.
2024-04-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due May 9, 2024)

Attorneys

Jacob Winding, et al.
Jacob Winding — Petitioner
Jacob Winding — Petitioner