Loading…
General Order 2026-10, signed by Hon. Mark R. Nareau, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court: under Code of Civil Procedure sections 367.10 and 367.75 and California Rules of Court, rule 10.635(e)(2), judicial officers temporarily assigned to the Court - Lassen County being a geographically large and rural county with limited locally available judicial resources - approved and authorized to preside remotely from a location outside a court facility in civil matters subject to section 367.75 when the assigned judicial officer is available to timely hear the matter remotely and requiring the judicial officer’s physical presence would result in a significant delay that would substantially prejudice the litigants, the order constituting the Presiding Judge’s approval required by rule 10.635(e); the factors considered (the availability of local judicial officers, the circumstances requiring assignment or reassignment, time constraints, the assigned officer’s availability and location, the delay and the resulting prejudice), judicial assignment, disqualification, travel distance, or scheduling conflict alone not establishing the requirements of rule 10.635(e)(2); in effect until rescinded, modified, or superseded.
California > Third Appellate District > Lassen County > Superior Court of California, County of Lassen
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LASSEN GENERAL ORDER 2026-10 REMOTE PRESIDING BY TEMPORARY ASSIGNED JUDICIAL OFFICERS IN CIVIL MATTERS Code of Civil Procedure section 367.10 authorizes the Judicial Council to establish standards under which a judicial officer, in limited situations and in the interest of justice, may preside over a remote court proceeding from a location other than a courtroom. California Rules of Court, rule 10.635 implements that authority for civil matters subject to Code of Civil Procedure section 367.75. Under rule 10.635(e)(2), a judicial officer may preside remotely from a location outside a court facility when doing so is in the interest of justice, the Presiding Judge approves, and presiding remotely in the matter is essential to prevent a significant delay that would substantially prejudice the litigants. Lassen County is a geographically large and rural county with limited locally available judicial resources. Judicial disqualification or recusal, including pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 170.1 and 170.6, judicial unavailability, statutory or rule-based time constraints, conflicting judicial assignments, and other circumstances may require civil matters to be heard by judicial officers temporarily assigned to this Court. Because such assigned judicial officers may be located substantial distances from Lassen County, requiring their physical presence may result in significant delay of proceedings notwithstanding their availability to timely hear those matters through remote technology. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 367.10 and 367.75 and California Rules of Court, rule 10.635(e)(2), as Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Lassen, I hereby approve and authorize judicial officers temporarily assigned to this Court to preside remotely from a location outside a court facility in civil matters subject to section 367.75 when the assigned judicial officer is available to timely hear the matter remotely and requiring the judicial officer's physical presence would result in a significant delay that would substantially prejudice the litigants. This General Order constitutes the approval of the Presiding Judge required by rule 10.635(e) for matters satisfying these conditions. This authorization is based upon the determination that, under such circumstances, remote participation is in the interest of justice and is essential to prevent the significant delay and resulting prejudice contemplated by rule 10.635(e)(2). In determining whether a particular matter falls within this authorization, consideration shall be given to the availability of local judicial officers, the circumstances requiring assignment or reassignment of the matter, applicable statutory or rule-based time constraints, the availability and location of the assigned judicial officer, the delay that would result from requiring physical attendance, and the resulting prejudice to the litigants. Judicial assignment, disqualification, travel distance, or scheduling conflict alone does not establish the requirements of rule 10.635(e)(2). This General Order shall remain in effect until rescinded, modified, or superseded by subsequent order of the Presiding Judge or by operation of law. Dated: , 2026 Hon. Mark R. Nareau Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LASSEN GENERAL ORDER 2026-10 REMOTE PRESIDING BY TEMPORARY ASSIGNED JUDICIAL OFFICERS IN CIVIL MATTERS Code of Civil Procedure section 367.10 authorizes the Judicial Council to establish standards under which a judicial officer, in limited situations and in the interest of justice, may preside over a remote court proceeding fro
Reviewer note: Transcribed 2026-10-12 (California T4 Lassen build 2026-10-12) by eye from BenchPath custody ca/t4/ca-lassen/docs/general-orders/general-order-2026-10.pdf (868244 bytes, sha256 2df9efa620f804fa22bc0dc2de2df9a9ef9357a8df06519b800759a389a60a10; 2 pages; scanned page images with an invisible OCR text layer): read on the page images rendered at 200 dpi; checked against RapidOCR on the pages and the file's own invisible OCR layer, never published: every 6-word window looked up, and of the 2 spans no reading holds, 2 split into pieces a reading holds (the filing stamp's date over the end of the court's name - the piece “OF CALIFORNIA” found only in the order's body - and the stamp's “BY:” and “DEPUTY CLERK” read into the heading) (vision/check-log.txt). Not part of the text: the page numbers; the clerk's filing stamp (“OCT 07 2026”, signed by a deputy clerk), which overprints the end of the court's name; the month and day written by hand on the date line's blank and the Presiding Judge's handwritten signature. The transcription's closing note, which describes the pages, is not published. Review note: The order’s date line prints “Dated:” and “, 2026” around a blank on which the month and day are written by hand; the clerk’s filing stamp reads October 7, 2026, the date the card carries. The order concerns judicial officers temporarily assigned to the court presiding remotely; remote appearances by parties and witnesses are Rule 6.2’s.
9 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-10.
6 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-13.