# Kaufman v. Court of Appeal

> California Supreme Court · July 19, 1982 · 31 Cal. 3d 933

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9547692

## Case

- **Full name:** MARCUS M. KAUFMAN, as Associate Justice, Etc., Petitioner, v. THE COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, Respondent; AGRICULTURAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Et Al., Real Parties in Interest
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** July 19, 1982
- **Citations:** 31 Cal. 3d 933; 184 Cal. Rptr. 933; 647 P.2d 1081; 1982 Cal. LEXIS 205
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Kaus
- **Judges:** Kaus
- **Cited by:** 11 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9547692

## Opinion text

KAUS, J.
I concur in the result mainly because on a question of this sort it is important that the outcome reflect the consensus of the court, even if that consensus commands widely disparate degrees of enthusiasm. At the same time I cannot resist a wistful note that with a certain amount of imagination — “liberal construction,” if you will — it would have been possible to read the procedural provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 170 so as to confer on each court — appellate as well *941 as trial — jurisdiction to determine the challenged qualification of justices or judges. Given that interpretation, Code of Civil Procedure section 187 would indeed come into play and should permit an appropriate procedure to be devised.
The petitions of real parties in interest for a rehearing were denied August 25, 1982. Bird, C. J., did not participate therein.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9547692. Public record. Not legal advice.