Short answer. No. Rule 20, Section 2 of the Rules of Court requires that the assignment of cases to the different branches of a court be done exclusively by raffle, in open session with adequate notice so interested parties can attend. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendant can pick the judge who will hear the case.
What the law says
The assignment of cases to the different branches of a court shall be done exclusively by raffle.
Rule 20, Section 2 — Assignment of cases. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The assignment shall be done in open session of which adequate notice shall be given so as to afford interested parties the opportunity to be present.
Rule 20, Section 2 — Assignment of cases. Read the full provision →
Raffle is the only method of assignment
The section admits no alternative: The assignment of cases to the different branches of a court shall be done exclusively by raffle. The word exclusively forecloses every other route — no filing strategy, no request to the clerk of court, no preference of counsel can direct a case to a particular branch. The design is deliberate. If litigants could steer cases to chosen judges, confidence in the courts would rest on connections rather than chance; the raffle makes branch assignment a matter of lot, equally beyond the reach of both sides.
The raffle happens in public
The second sentence supplies the safeguard: The assignment shall be done in open session of which adequate notice shall be given so as to afford interested parties the opportunity to be present. Assignment is not a back-office act. Notice must go out, the session must be open, and any party who wants to watch the drawing of lots may do so. If you have just filed a case, or been served with one, you are entitled to know when the raffle will take place and to attend it — presence is the cheapest insurance that the assignment was regular.
What a party can choose — and what it cannot
Litigants do make one important selection: where to file, within the rules on jurisdiction and venue. Those rules determine which court hears the case; Rule 20, Section 2 then takes over and determines which branch of that court gets it. The distinction matters because parties sometimes assume that choosing the city or the court carries with it a choice of sala. It does not. Once the case reaches a court with several branches, the raffle — and only the raffle — assigns it, and both sides take the branch the lot produces.
If something about the assignment seems off
Concerns come in two kinds, and they have different homes. If the worry is that the raffle itself was irregular — held without notice, or not in open session — the objection starts from this section's requirements, and the record of the raffle is the first thing to examine. If the worry is instead about the judge the raffle produced — a relationship to the other party, some ground to doubt impartiality — that is a question of disqualification or inhibition, a separate matter governed by its own rules, not a defect in the assignment. Naming which problem you actually have is the first step a lawyer will take.