SAN FRANCISCO, Aug. 3 — Lawyers for Gov. Gray Davis of California said today that they would file a legal challenge on Monday to the Oct. 7 recall election that if successful would delay the vote until March and would allow Governor Davis to run to replace himself.

The decision added new confusion to the already convoluted recall election, which has been the subject of numerous other lawsuits. Nearly 300 people have expressed an interest in appearing on the ballot as a possible successor to Governor Davis, a Democrat, with the deadline for filing the final paperwork less than a week away.

"This is what was to be expected," said Rob Stutzman, a spokesman for the state Republican Party, which supports the recall. "The courts are his only way to deny the people the election that they deserve."

Though aides to Governor Davis had hinted that they were exploring possible legal challenges, today's announcement was a surprise to many. Even one of the governor's top political advisers said tonight that he had not known about it. Governor Davis has insisted in public appearances that he is prepared to stand before the voters and has expressed confidence that he will win.

But Peter Ragone, communications director for Californians Against the Costly Recall, the committee formed by the governor to fight the election, said it became evident to Governor Davis in the past week that an Oct. 7 vote would be "unfair to the voters" and that it should be delayed.

"Anything and everything that has anything to do with the election is moving at the speed of light," Mr. Ragone said. "After an examination of events that unfolded in the past week, it is has been extremely clear to us that the voice of the voters in this state could be squelched."

In a legal memorandum prepared for the lawsuit, which Mr. Ragone said would be filed on Monday in San Francisco with the California Supreme Court, lawyers for Governor Davis raised a number of objections.

Among them were doubts about the ability of various counties across the state to prepare adequately for the vote. Some counties have announced that they would use the same punch card systems that led to the legal challenges in Florida in the last presidential election. Other counties have said they would reduce the number of polling places.

"The result is a disparity of voting opportunity that makes Florida's election procedures look almost pristine by comparison," the memorandum said.

The lawyers also suggested that Governor Davis would not be treated fairly in an Oct. 7 election because the recall ballot, as announced by Kevin Shelley, the California secretary of state, would not allow him to run as a possible successor to himself.

California's budget woes have played a large part in the recall effort against Governor Davis. On Saturday he signed a nearly $100 billion budget that ended months of partisan debate but also left a multibillion-dollar shortfall for the next fiscal year.

The ballot as envisioned by Mr. Shelley would have two parts. In the first, voters would be asked whether Governor Davis should be recalled. In the second, they would be asked to choose a successor from a list of candidates should he lose the first vote. Mr. Shelley has ruled that Governor Davis is barred under the state constitution from appearing on the second part of the ballot.

The governor's lawyers, however, said the decision amounted to "equal protection violations" for him by creating "a system in which the votes favoring Gray Davis as governor are given less weight than other votes for exactly the same office."

Mr. Stutzman said Governor Davis was trying to change the rules.

"Instead of spending time with Californians trying to convince them they should retain him," Mr. Stutzman said, "he has been cowardly huddling with lawyers trying to figure out ways to deny Californians the election they have duly earned the right to."