No Disqualification: I Told You About It; Now Forever Hold Your Peace.

It’s a family law case, and the commissioner presiding over the matter, who has post- judgment support matters still pending, has agreed to preside over the wedding of the wife’s lawyer. The husband petitioned the appellate court for a writ of mandate, seeking disqualification of the commissioner under Code of Civil Procedure section 170.1, which says a judge is disqualified if “a person aware of the facts might reasonably entertain a doubt that the judge would be able to be impartial,” after the trial court denied his motion to disqualify. The appellate court denied extraordinary relief noting in People v. Carter (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1215, [117 P.3d 544, 32 Cal.Rptr.3d 838], “the California Supreme Court found no appearance of partiality where the trial judge officiated at the wedding of the prosecutor’s daughter several months before the judge presided over the defendant’s death penalty trial.”  Here, the appellate court stated:  “Following Carter, we conclude that when a judge has no personal or social relationship with the attorney and the judge’s only role at the wedding is that of an officiant, disclosure is required (California Code of Judicial Ethics, canon 3(E)(2)(a)), but disqualification is not mandated absent additional facts.” (Kenneth Wechsler v. Sup. Ct. (Kimberly Wechsler) (Cal. App. Fourth Dist., Div. 1; March 4, 2014)224 Cal. App.4th 384, [168 Cal.Rptr.3d 605].)