Skip to main content
Skip to main content.

Family Law Tentative Rulings

Family Law Tentative Ruling Announcements



The family court issues tentative ruling announcements on the court day prior to the scheduled hearing for specific types of motions. Tentative rulings are only provided on the Internet and posted in the clerk’s office lobby. Internet postings occur at 1:30 p.m. daily.

Parties are not required to give notice of intent to appear to preserve the right to a hearing. The tentative ruling will not become final until the hearing. (Stan. Cnty. Local Rules, rule 7.05.1) However, as a courtesy to the Court, and other parties or counsel with matters on calendar, notice of intended appearance or non-appearance is encouraged and may be sent by e-mail to the following address: between the hours of 1:30 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. If you do not receive a confirmation e-mail from the clerk, you may call to speak directly with a Calendar Clerk at 209-530-3107.

Any party filing pleadings or documents on a tentative ruling matter within five (5) days of the hearing should provide a courtesy copy to the Courtroom Clerk and the Court’s Family Law Research Attorney by placing a copy in the drop box slot on the door of Room 223, Second Floor of the main Courthouse. Failure to do so may prevent the Court from consideration of such, may result in a continuance, and/or may be considered in the award of conduct-based fees and costs. (Stan. Cnty. Local Rules, rule 7.05.1(B).)

All parties and counsel are required to meet and confer in a good faith effort to resolve the dispute on any request, motion or hearing, with the exception of those involving domestic violence, and to exchange any documents upon which reliance will be made at the hearing. (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.98; Stan. Cnty. Local Rules, rule 7.05.1(C).) Failure to do so may result in a continuance and may be considered in the award of conduct-based fees and costs, or both. If sufficient information regarding an adequate pre-hearing meet and confer effort is not provided in the moving and opposing papers, in the Court’s discretion, the matter may be placed at the end of the calendar and not called until the parties or counsel advise the Court that they have complied with their obligations and/or resolved the matter.


Date: February 6, 2023

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Alan Cassidy in Department #11:

FL-19-003314 – PROUTY VS BANDA

Petitioner’s Request for Order re “Change of Jurisdiction.”—HEARING REQUIRED.

Counsel for Petitioner does not list a California State Bar number demonstrating that counsel is licensed to practice law in California.  (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6125 [No person shall practice law in California unless the person is an active licensee of the State Bar]; Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.5(b).)  The Court has the power to admit out-of-state counsel pro hac vice, but counsel must first satisfy the requirements, pay the necessary fees, file the requisite application and be approved by the Court to do so.  (See, Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 9.40; Cal. Gov’t Code, § 70617; see also, Weil & Brown, Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Pro. Before Trial (TRG 2022) Ch. 9(I)-G, § 9:401 et seq.; Rivera, Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Pro. Before Trial Forms (TRG 2022) Form 9A:24.) 

Accordingly, Petitioner’s counsel is directed to appear and advise the Court whether an application to appear pro hac vice will be filed and, if not, counsel will then be directed by the Court to withdraw as counsel of record for Petitioner either by voluntary substitution of attorney or by motion to be relieved by a date certain.  (See, Cal. Code Civ. Proc., § 284; Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1362; Cal. Judicial Council forms MC-01, MC-02, MC-03.)  The Court is confident that counsel for Petitioner is undoubtedly aware of the grave and deleterious professional repercussions that may ensue from non-compliance and will take prompt action to rectify the present situation.

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge J. Richard Distaso in Department #13: 


The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Jack M. Jacobson in Department #14:

FL-22-002269- MADRIGAL VS MENDOZA – Stanislaus County Department of Child Support Services’ Motion to Set Aside Judgement -HEARING REQUIRED.

FL-22-000201- SALAS VS SALAS Respondent’s Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel– GRANTED.

Code of Civil Procedure §284(2) enables an attorney in an action to be changed any time before or after judgment or final determination upon the order of the Court, upon the application of either client or attorney and after notice from one to the other.

Additionally, the notice of motion and motion, the declaration, and the proposed order must be served on the client and on all other parties who have appeared in the case. (CRC Rule 3.1362).

Respondent’s Attorney’s Motion complies with the above requirements and is hereby GRANTED.

The Court’s order relieving Counsel shall take effect upon the filing of proof of service of the order on Respondent.

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Marcus L. Mumford in Department #25:


Petitioner’s Request for Order re “Re-open case, etc.”—DENIED, without prejudice.

Petitioner has not filed proof of service, as required.  (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.94(b).) 

Was this helpful?