‘Boxing Helena’ Judge Won’t Be Presiding Over Retrial : Lawsuit: Kim Basinger’s defense attorney files a peremptory motion against Judge Judith Chirlin. The $8.1-million ruling against the actress was overturned.

In late September, the 2nd District Court of Appeal overturned a March, 1993, Superior Court ruling that awarded $8.1 million to Main Line Pictures, which charged actress Kim Basinger with reneging on an agreement to appear in the film “Boxing Helena.”

The case is headed for a retrial next year in Superior Court, but the judge who presided over the controversial case will not be on the bench.

Basinger’s attorney, Howard Weitzman, filed a peremptory challenge Tuesday to disqualify Judge Judith Chirlin from presiding over the second trial, and the judge acknowledged Wednesday that she will not be on the bench.

“This was done to ensure there is no way she could hear this case again,” said Weitzman, adding that his concern with Chirlin extends far beyond the technicality that caused the reversal by the appellate court. “We believe she has a bias.”

Weitzman claims the judge’s prejudice for Main Line and against Basinger “was evident throughout the course of the trial. When I got a call from (Chirlin’s) clerk asking me to (be available for) a new court date, I was amazed. She should have recused herself from presiding over a new trial because of hers and her clerk’s behavior.”

Chirlin said Wednesday that she saw no need to recuse herself from the retrial.

In January The Times reported that Chirlin not only attended the “Boxing Helena” premiere but hugged the plaintiffs after the verdict was announced. She also asked Basinger to attend a baby shower for her clerk, Syndy Scaife-Richard, during the trial, which the actress said she felt compelled to attend. And the clerk asked Basinger for a $125,000-loan to buy a house.

Main Line’s attorney Patricia Glaser jumped to Chirlin’s defense. “This judge is not prejudicial. She is an accomplished fair jurist. Let them criticize away. When you criticize a judge it’s a sign you’re a sore loser,” Glaser said. “We will beat them again. And this time I have their sworn trial testimony to use, which should make (the victory) come much faster.”

The high-profile, arduous case threw the actress into bankruptcy last year. But, earlier this year, the three-judge appeals court panel ruled that verdict forms prepared by Chirlin allowed the jury to find that “Basinger and/or Mighty Wind” (Basinger’s production company) had entered into a contract with Main Line Pictures, an independent movie company, and breached it.

“The ‘and/or’ (verdict forms) are prejudicially ambiguous and require reversal,” the panel ruled. Once an appellate decision is rendered, the case is automatically returned to the Superior Court for a new trial. It is up to the losing party on the appeal, in this case the plaintiff, Main Line, to pursue a new trial.