Family Law Tentative Rulings

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 3:30 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: familylaw.tentatives@stanct.org 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: April 25, 2024

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

FL-23-002366 – ANDERSON VS ANDERSON Petitioner’s Request for Order re Change Venue—Granted.

The Court finds that proof of personal service by the Sheriff’s Civil Division is on file and that Respondent was individually served on April 2, 2024.  Accordingly, notice and service are presumptively valid.  (Fam. Code, § 215; Code Civ. Proc., § 1005(b).)  Respondent has filed no Responsive Declaration or other written opposition. 

FL-23-000568 – ALBERTO VS ALBERTO Petitioner’s Request for Order re Spousal Support, etc.—HEARING REQUIRED, in part; GRANTED, in part, and as modified.

The requests for spousal and child support require a hearing.

The request that the settlement proceeds from Respondent’s alleged personal injury settlement “which exceeds two hundred thousand dollars” be placed “in trust” is granted, but granted as modified by the Court’s tentative ruling.

Whether the parties and their counsel have reached an agreement as to deposit of “half” these funds or not, the Court need not and will not accept this in the absence of a formal and approved stipulation and order to this effect.  Almost no information regarding this alleged personal injury settlement has been provided by the parties and, without it, the Court cannot make any findings as to characterization and, more specifically, whether the funds constitute “community estate personal injury damages” governed by Family Code section 2603.  If so, then the Court’s discretion with respect to characterization and division is circumscribed by the following:

Community estate personal injury damages shall be assigned to the party who suffered the injuries unless the court, after taking into account the economic condition and needs of each party, the time that has elapsed since the recovery of the damages or the accrual of the cause of action, and all other facts of the case, determines that the interests of justice require another disposition. In such a case, the community estate personal injury damages shall be assigned to the respective parties in such proportions as the court determines to be just, except that at least one-half of the damages shall be assigned to the party who suffered the injuries.  (Fam. Code, § 2603(b), emphasis added.) 

Accordingly, the Court intends to order the settlement proceeds to be deposited into an FDIC-insured, interest-bearing and blocked account at a financial institution of Respondent’s choice subject to the Court’s approval, with no proceeds to be distributed without further order of the Court.  At the hearing, the Court is to be provided by Respondent and/or Respondent’s counsel with the following information and documents:

• The civil action number and county of filing, if any;
• The procedural posture and status of the civil action, if any;
• The Respondent’s retained attorney(s) or counsel of record for the claim, if any;
• Copies of the pleadings, statement of damages, and 998 offers, if any;
• Identification of any and all liens asserted against recovery, if any;
• Listing of proposed or previously disbursed funds for attorney fees, costs, liens or other advances or deductions;
• The current placement of the settlement funds, including if in an existing IOLTA account.

If any of the preceding does not constitute a court record or public record, and confidentiality or privacy is at issue, then Respondent and Respondent’s counsel may so advise the Court and, if deemed necessary and appropriate, the Court may entertain a protective order and/or the sealing of such documents provided good cause is established under the governing statutes and Rules of Court.  A breakdown of the economic and non-economic damages, both present and future, would be helpful to the Court.  Likewise, if the settlement is based on a predetermined allocation between the categories of general and special damages, then that would be equally helpful to the Court.

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

THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Sweena Pannu in Department #14:

THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge David I. Hood in Department #25:

THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.