§ 170.4.Permissible actions by disqualified judge
Title 2. Judicial Officers · Chapter 3. Disqualifications of Judges · Enacted 1984 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 28, 2026
Full Text of § 170.4
Plain-English Summary
Disqualification does not freeze a case entirely. § 170.4(a) lets a disqualified judge keep the court’s jurisdiction intact and handle a short list of administrative tasks: requesting an agreed-upon substitute, hearing default matters, issuing a pre-judgment possession order in eminent domain, setting trial or hearing dates, and conducting settlement conferences.
Subdivision (b) lets a trial judge strike a statement of disqualification that was filed too late or that shows no legal ground on its face. Subdivision (c) handles statements filed mid-proceeding — after voir dire begins, the first witness is sworn, or a motion is submitted for decision. The challenged judge can let the proceeding continue while another judge decides the disqualification question, but if that judge turns out to be disqualified, every ruling made after the statement was filed gets vacated.
Subdivision (c) also closes a scheduling loophole: in a single-judge court, a trial set 30 or more days in advance before a known judge is treated as having commenced 10 days before the scheduled date, for grounds known before that point. And a party generally gets one statement of disqualification per judge per case, unless new grounds surface later.
Outside these carve-outs, § 170.4(d) is categorical: a disqualified judge has no power to act until the disqualification question is resolved.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a disqualified California judge still do anything in the case?
Yes, within limits. § 170.4(a) allows a disqualified judge to protect the court’s jurisdiction, handle default matters, set trial dates, and conduct settlement conferences, among a short list of other tasks.
What happens to rulings made after a statement of disqualification is filed mid-trial?
If another judge later confirms the disqualification, § 170.4(c)(1) requires vacating every order and ruling the challenged judge made after the statement was filed.
Can a party file more than one statement of disqualification against the same judge?
Generally no. § 170.4(c)(3) limits a party to one statement per judge in a case unless facts supporting new grounds arise or are discovered later.
Can a trial judge throw out an untimely disqualification statement?
Yes. § 170.4(b) lets the judge against whom it was filed strike a statement that is untimely or that shows no legal grounds on its face.
Amendment History
Added Stats 1984 ch 1555 § 8.