Civil Procedure
Jul. 1, 2026
An extraordinary right, narrowed by an extraordinary abuse
California's J.O. v. Superior Court limits abusive peremptory challenges by allowing scrutiny of repeated strikes against judges, even as it raises concerns about challenges based on perceived judicial bias.
Okorie Okorocha
Okorie Okorocha is a dual-trained toxicologist and trial attorney, and founder of Toxicolawgy.com
The facts behind J.O. v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court's May 28 decision, are not the kind most litigants will ever see. After a San Joaquin County judge admonished a deputy county counsel for improper conduct, that office allegedly filed "an estimated 325 challenges (against a judge in conservatorship cases) in the span of less than four months," or roughly four peremptory challenges per court day, causing her removal from the entire specialized calenda...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$895, but save $100 when you subscribe today… Just $795 for the first year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In