Opinion ID: 2632298
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The New Judge Should Decide All Remaining Matters, Including Cook's Motion To Set Aside the Default Judgment.

Text: Since the superior court erroneously denied Cook's peremptory challenge, decisions made by that court subsequent to the denial are void. [19] The valid exercise of a peremptory challenge divests the challenged judge of authority to act in the case. As we stated in Channel Flying, Inc. v. Bernhardt , [20] The only meaning that can be given to the requirement [in AS 22.20.022(a) ] that the matter be assigned at once and without requiring proof to another judge, is that when a timely and proper affidavit is filed the judge concerned is at once disqualified from acting as a judge in the particular action or proceeding. When [s]he is disqualified [s]he no longer possesses the qualities . . . of power, capacity, fitness or competency to proceed further. In short, when a proper affidavit has been timely filed, the judge involved is without power or jurisdiction to take any further action in the proceeding. [21] We have consistently followed this rule. [22] No reason appears in this case to depart from it. Therefore, Cook's motion to set aside the default judgment should be remanded to the superior court for assignment to a new judge. That new judge should decide all matters arising after the peremptory challenge was made. The decision that the challenge was timely does not invalidate the default judgment itself, which was entered by the superior court before Cook filed his peremptory challenge. Since the superior court was without jurisdiction to rule on the motion to set aside the default judgment, Cook's appeal of that decision is moot. There is, therefore, no reason for this court to rule on any issue  including the pending motion to set aside the default  that is not properly before it. For this reason, I dissent from today's per curiam opinion to the extent it reaches the question of setting aside the default judgment. Instead, that matter should be resolved by the superior court on remand.