The Justices of the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Div. 3 refused to recuse themselves from the appeal of a judgment against Petitioners in which they lost their homes and were saddled with six figure obligations for supposed unpaid rent. The Judgment came about in a scenario where, during the litigation, Petitioners had sued the ADR company where Div. 3 Justices have routinely retired post bench to a lucrative employment as a "neutral." Petitioners also sued the co-founder of the ADR company, who was also the first and founding Div. 3 Presiding Justice. In addition, based on alleged unlawful acts and rulings by the trial court judge and the appellate justices, Petitioners sued two (2) of the Div. 3 appellate justices who despite having been sued by Petitioners, and although the federal lawsuit was later dismissed without prejudice, entered and made rulings and wrote the Opinion in Petitioners' appeal. (Appendix A) The question presented is whether the Div. 3 Justices' failure to recuse themselves from participation in the appeal violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Whether the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Div. 3 justices should have recused themselves from the appeal of a judgment against the petitioners, given that the petitioners had sued the ADR company where the justices routinely retired post-bench, as well as the co-founder of the ADR company who was also the first and founding Div. 3 Presiding Justice