Minn. Juve. Prot. P. 7.06
A party or the county attorney may file with the court and serve upon all other parties a notice to remove a particular judge or referee under the procedures and standards set forth in Rule 63 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure. When a permanent placement matter or termination of parental rights matter is filed in connection with a child is the subject of a pending child in need of protection or services matter, the permanency or termination matter shall be considered a continuation of the protection matter for purposes of this rule. For that reason, if the judge or referee assigned to hear the protection matter is assigned to hear the permanency or termination matter, the parties and the county attorney cannot disqualify the assigned judge or referee as a matter of right.
Minn. Juve. Prot. P. 7.06
2019 Advisory Committee Comment
Rule 7 is amended in 2019 as part of a revision of the Rules of Juvenile Protection Procedure. The amendments to Rule 7 are intended to establish a consistent standard for removal of judges or referees.
Former Rule 7.03 governed the process for removing a particular referee from presiding over a case, either as of right or for cause. This closely tracked the process for removing a particular judge from presiding over a case, in former Rule 7.07. Both judges and referees are governed by the Code of Judicial Conduct, and the committee believes the same process should govern removals of judges and removals of referees. Accordingly, former Rule 7.03 has been deleted, and removals of judges and referees are now governed by Rule 7.06. The rule incorporates the judicial removal procedures of Civil Procedure Rule 63, which in turn allows for a limited opportunity to remove a judge as of right, and (as of July 1, 2018) incorporates the Code of Judicial Conduct. The same standard is used in the Rules of Criminal Procedure (Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.03, subd. 14) and the Rules of Juvenile Delinquency Procedure (Minn. R. Juv. Del. P. 22). Rule 7.06 clarifies that for purposes of removals of right, a permanency or termination proceeding filed in connection with a pending CHIPS proceeding is considered a continuation of the CHIPS proceeding. Essentially, each party has a one-time opportunity to remove a judge or referee as of right, and that right does not arise again if a CHIPS proceeding goes on to a permanency or termination proceeding.