FILED
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER
AUG 20 2010
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF 74 rs
COUNTY OF ORANGE in borTe®
C33
Dy OW Taste, ESQ
Plaint/Petiioner
120 No.3 O AAC IOUS
DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
RE DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE
{C.CP. 170.6)
Dan roa Den a @ Z
DetendartRespondent
ly Tak dectres
that DECLARANTisthe attomey for Co-/y “Fez,
@ party to the within action, and in support of DECLARANT'S motion to disqualify judge, states
That dee FE LS mwjxigadotore whom he
trial or hearing in the aforesaid action or special proceeding is pending, or to whom it is
as follo\
assigned, prejudiced against the party or party's attorney, or the interest of the party or
party's attorney, so that DECLARANT camnot, or believes that he/she cannot, have a fair and
impartial trial or hearing before such judge.
‘The aforementioned judge hashas not presided over a hearing, motion, or proceeding
in the past in this case,
| declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Calliornia that the
foregoing is true and corect.
Dated: OBE IO
202 (REV. 199) MOTION TO DISQUALIFY JUDGE (C.C.P. 170.6)10
a
13
1a
as
16
oy
18
19
22
23
2
25
Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688
‘Tel: (949) 683-5411; Fax (949) 766-3078
California State Bar No.: 223433
orly.taite@gmail.com
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
Case No.: 30-2010-00381664
DR ORLY TAITZ, ESQ
CCP-170.6 MOTION
DECLARATION in SUPPORT OF 170.6
MOTION
Plaintiff,
)
}
)
at 1
DAMON DUNN et al, i
Defendant }
Plaintiff in this action declares that she believes that she will not be able to get a fair hearing
before the assigned judge and requests the case reassigned.
‘There was only one emergency ex-parte heating on this case before the assigned judge.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of Ca that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated 07.15.10.
Keo
/siOrly Taitz,
I declare under the penalty of perjury and laws of CA that a true and correct copy of the above
‘was served on the defendant.
Js/ Orly Taitz Ge
Taitz v Dunn 170.6 motion