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 matters own motion, the Court orders Respondent to comply within thirty (30) days of this ruling and admonishes Respondent that the failure to do so may result in the striking of the Response and entry of Respondent’s default.

As both threshold findings are required, this obviates the need to consider the second finding but, for future reference should the matter ever be renewed, the Court offers the following observations gleaned from the caselaw.  The question of “sufficient means” is to be determined not by any marital standard of living test, as with spousal support, nor by any accustomed financial circumstances consistent with the child’s best interests within the parties’ ability to pay standard as with support of minor children, but rather by the likelihood that without court-ordered support the adult child will become a public charge.  (Marriage of Drake, supra, 53 Cal.App.4th at 1154.) 

Lastly, it is important to note that, even if court-ordered adult child support is found to be necessary and appropriate, any payments ordered do not necessarily go to the party currently having physical custody of the adult child, but may in the Court’s discretion be ordered payable to a “special needs trust” or, in appropriate cases, to a conservator, guardian or legal representative of the adult child.  It should therefore not be presumed that any money Respondent is ordered to pay for adult child support will be paid to Petitioner.  Moreover, to the extent that Respondent is ordered to pay temporary spousal support and/or attorney’s fees and costs, those payments must be factored into any determination of Respondent’s ability to pay, along with a determination of Petitioner’s own ability to pay (or offsetting credit) of her co-equal duty to pay whatever amount is set for adult child support.  (See, Hogoboom & King, Cal. Prac. Guide Family L. (TRG 2026) Ch. 6-A, § 6:56-6:57.)

In short, the Court is inclined to deny the request for adult child support without prejudice but, as noted infra, the Court’s statutory jurisdiction over the issue is reserved and may not be terminated as a matter of law.

Date: August 20, 2026

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

FL-25-002321 – HOLDEN VS JENSEN

Respondent’s Request for Order re Set Aside, etc.—HEARING REQUIRED.

The child custody request has been mediated and is not at issue here.  Proof of personal service of Petitioner is on file and Petitioner has not filed a Responsive Declaration or other opposition.

Respondent’s request to set aside the default that was entered is based on the allegation that “all paperwork” that has been served on him was sent to a mailing address that is not in existence and at which he has never resided.  The Proof of Service of the Summons on the Amended Petition, etc., alleges personal service of Respondent and is presumptively valid.  Respondent’s declaration does not deny or allege defective service of anything except what was served via mail.  Moreover, a motion to set aside the entry of default based on surprise, mistake, inadvertence and/or excusable neglect must be filed and served within six (6) months of the entry of default, which in this case occurred on October 21, 2025.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 473(b); Arambula v. Union Carbide Corp. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 333, 341-342.)  No other authority has been cited and no other factual basis to set aside the default has been alleged.

That said, Respondent’s Request to Enter Default on the Amended Petition did not attach the required financial disclosures and Respondent checked the boxes on the Judicial Council form excusing such attachments because, allegedly, there were “no changes since the previous filing,” and because all the “issues subject to disposition” were the subject of a “written agreement.”  (Request to Enter Default, FL-165, 10/21/25, p. 1, No. 3(a),(b).)  However, the Court’s docket discloses no such filings prior to the entry of Respondent’s default and, based on Respondent’s declaration and unopposed motion to set aside, it is clear that there is no executed Marital Settlement Agreement (MSA) or other formal written compromise.  Accordingly, entry of Respondent’s default without the required attachments renders the default—and any judgment that might be entered on this basis—void ab initio and subject to set aside at any time and on the Court’s own motion.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 473(d), 580; see Local Rules, rule 7.03 [“Unless properly excused, a complete and current Income and Expense Declaration or a Financial Statement (Simplified), and a complete and current Property Declaration shall be attached to the Request to Enter Default. The failure to include the disclosure documents, if required, shall be deemed a sufficient basis to set aside the entry of default upon timely request”], emphasis added.)  The Court is therefore inclined to grant set aside but will afford Respondent the opportunity to appear and be heard before doing so.

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 Sarah Birmingham in Department #14: 

THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Maria Elena Ramos-Ratliff in Department #25:  

THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.