Skip to main content
Skip to main content.

COVID-19 Update:

Pursuant to Executive Order 205, appropriate face coverings are currently strongly recommended. View updates related to COVID-19.

Tentative Rulings

Nevada City

Click on any of the links below to view the current tentative rulings in that category, or call (530)  362-4309 (option 8).

Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

August 5, 2022   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

THE COURT HAS CREATED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS FOR REQUESTING ORAL ARGUMENT.  PLEASE SEE BELOW

 

In re Laurel Wright                                                      Case No. CU0000043

Appearances are required by the parties or their respective counsel. This is a status hearing only. The Court requires an update on the case, including the parties’ proposed briefing schedule and date for a contested hearing.


Elder v. Oyung                                                              Case No. CL19-084361

Appearances are required by counsel for both parties.  The matter is presently before the Court on two separate but closely-related motions: (1) Plaintiff’s motion for reclassification and for continuance of trial dates; and (2) Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. 

On the Court’s own motion, the matter is reclassified as an unlimited civil matter. (Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 403.040(a).)  Any party opposed to the same may respond and offer reasons for the same at the hearing.  (See Stern v. Superior Court (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 223.) The parties dispute the validity of the original loan, performance of the original loan, as well as title to the property pledged as security.  The interests of justice would be best served by resolving all of these issues on the merits.  (See e.g., Thatcher v. Lucky Stores, Inc. (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 1081, 1085 [recognizing the “strong policy against disposing of cases on procedural deficiencies rather than trying cases on the merits”].)

Plaintiff’s motion to continue the trial dates is granted.  The court trial presently set for August 22, 2022, is hereby vacated.  Given the age of the case, the matter is reset for court trial on November 1, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6. At the August 5, 2022, hearing, the parties are to present the Court with an agreed schedule to complete all pre-trial proceedings for the purposes of a trial on November 1, 2022.

Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied for the reasons discussed more fully below.

(1)   Reclassification is granted on the Court’s own motion under Section 403.040(a).

Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 403.040(a) provides that the “court, on its own motion, may reclassify a case at any time” and that the “court shall grant the motion and enter an order for reclassification, regardless of any fault or lack of fault, if the case has been classified in an incorrect jurisdictional classification”  (Id.)  The Court’s exercise of this power is conditioned on the parties being provided “sufficient opportunity to respond and offer reasons why [reclassification] should or should not be ordered.”  (See Stern, supra, 105 Cal.App.4th at 231.)  Here, the parties have had a full opportunity to brief, provide declarations and supporting exhibits, and argue the issue of reclassification.

The case of Ytuarte v. Superior Court (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 266 specifically deals with the question of when a case is incorrectly classified and the standard the Court should apply in making its assessment for purposes of Section 403.040.

In Ytuarte, the court dealt with a situation where a case was initially filed as an unlimited civil action and was later reclassified by the Court after its sua sponte issuance of an order to show cause for the same.  The matter came on appeal after movant sought to thereafter reclassify the matter yet again to an unlimited civil matter under Section 403.040(b) and was denied by the trial court.  (Id. at 270.)  The Court, overturning the trial court’s denial, articulated the standard as follows:

“[Movant] is not required to show ‘the high level of certainty ... the damage award will exceed $25,000’ to obtain reclassification.  Instead, [movant] must present evidence to demonstrate a possibility the damages will exceed $25,000.  The trial court, without adjudicating the merits of the underlying case, should review the record to determine whether a judgment in excess of $25,000 is obtainable.  If a jurisdictionally appropriate verdict may result, […] the court should grant the motion to reclassify the case as ‘unlimited.’  Concomitantly, the court may deny the motion only where it appears to a legal certainty that the plaintiff’s damage will necessarily be $25,000 or less.”

(Id. at 482-483, emphasis original.)  The Ytuarte court clearly notes that the above standard applies equally to cases that are at their inception filed as limited civil matters.  (Id. at 280, fn. 5.)  In crafting the standard above, the Court pulled heavily from the case of Walker v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 257, which dealt with reclassification of cases from unlimited to limited. 

In Walker, the high court’s reasoning was based heavily around a concern for avoiding the deprivation of remedies imposed on a Plaintiff that naturally flows from reclassifying a matter from unlimited to limited.  (See id. at 271 [reclassification from unlimited to limited is an “extreme” authority to be sparingly used owing to its inherent deprivation of remedies imposed on a plaintiff].)  Ytuarte, dealing with the converse situation – moving from limited to unlimited – notes that the concerns in Walker are simply absent insofar as “classification as an unlimited case deprives plaintiff of nothing – the court in an unlimited case may enter a damage award that exceeds or falls below $25,000.”  (Ytuarte, supra, 129 Cal.App.4th at 278-279.)  Based on that reasoning, the Court concluded:  “[T]he court should reject [a] plaintiff’s effort to reclassify the action as unlimited only when the lack of jurisdiction as an ‘unlimited’ case is certain and clear.

Here, Defendant’s own opposition indicates the property at issue in this case is “worth at or above $350,000.”  (Defendant’s Opposition to Motion to Reclassify, Pg. 1, Lines 18-20.)  Plaintiff’s briefing is in agreement:  “the Property … has an estimated worth of over $350,000.”  (Plaintiff’s Reply to Defendant’s Opposition, Pg. 4, Lines 20-22.)  The heart of this particular case and the primary relief sought by Plaintiff is for the title of the subject property to be returned to him in accordance with the note.  Ytuarte counsels that the court may deny reclassification only where “it appears to a legal certainty” that the damages will necessarily be $25,000 or less.  The exact opposite is true here: the value of damages at issue in this case are undisputedly in excess.  The foregoing is dispositive of the question of whether this case is improperly classified, but there are other factors that warrant further consideration.

Keeping in mind the Walker and Ytuarte courts’ admonitions about fundamental notions of due process, to wit: a need to avoid a plaintiff’s unnecessary deprivation of remedies based on classification, the Court must consider the effect of Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 86(b)(1), which, as Defendant concedes, prevents a court presiding over a limited civil case from trying title to real property.  (Ytuarte, supra, 129 Cal.App.4th at 275 [interpreting Section 86(b)(1) and stating “a court in a limited civil action cannot determine the title to real property”].)  The above point in Ytuarte is well taken, and, if this matter remains as a limited civil action, Plaintiff will necessarily be deprived of his ability to try issues of title to the subject property.

Defendant argues in connection with this particular element that Plaintiff must, in addition to showing improper classification, demonstrate he is not at fault for the case being improperly characterized to get the requested relief.  The Court is not persuaded.  Defendant offers no citations to statute or case law for this proposition.  Section 403.040 contains no such requirements and nothing in either Walker or Ytuarte compel such a conclusion.

For all the foregoing reasons, the matter is reclassified on the Court’s own motion under Section 403.040(a).

(2)   The motion to continue to the trial is granted.

In evaluating a motion for continuance, the Court is guided by consideration of the non-exclusive list of factors contained in Ca. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332. (See also Oliveros v. County of Los Angeles (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 1389, 1394 [court must consider Rule 3.1332 factors when ruling on continuances but the policy of deciding cases on the merits is the overriding concern].)

Plaintiff specifically points to two factors: (1) continuance may be based on a significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for trial; and (2) continuance should be granted as a failure to do so would deprive the party of an opportunity to “fully and fairly present the party’s case.”  Both points are closely related and well taken given the foregoing authorities.  The reclassification is a significant change in the status of the litigation, which will understandably result in the parties not being immediately ready for trial.  Further, with the reclassification granted as discussed above, discovery is no longer constrained by the rules of economic litigation and the parties will, as noted in the moving papers, require additional time to prepare the case for trial. 

(3)   Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied.

Apart from the timing considerations, a motion for judgment on the pleadings is essentially analogous to a general demurrer.  (Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 438(f); International Association of Firefighters Local 230 v. City of San Jose (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1179, 1196.)  In ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the court assumes the truth of, and must liberally construe, all properly plead factual allegations in the complaint and any matters subject to judicial notice.  (Berzidijan v. O’Reily (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 316, 321.)  The standard for granting a motion for judgment on the pleadings can be phrased as follows: “under the state of the pleadings, together with matters that may be judicially noticed, it appears that a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”  (Id.)  Critically, the Court does not resolve questions of witness credibility or evidentiary conflicts in conducting its review.  (Id.)

Defendant raises two separate basis in support of his motion: (1) a court in a limited civil action is without jurisdiction and is statutorily precluded from determining title to real property; Defendant also argues that specific performance or rescission of a contract are similarly barred here; and (2) the pleadings are defective for a claim of breach of contract insofar as the face of Plaintiff’s pleadings admit he has failed to perform the contract as required.

Defendant relies on Ytuarte in support of the argument that a court may not determine title to real property in a civil matter.  (Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 86(b)(1); Ytuarte, supra, 129 Cal.App.4th at 275 [interpreting Section 86(b)(1) and stating “a court in a limited civil action cannot determine the title to real property”].)   The holding in Yuarte is, however, inapposite for cases classified as unlimited civil matters.  Defendant’s argument is thus mooted by the Court’s grant of reclassification.  His argument that the Court is unable to consider questions of specific performance or rescission is similarly mooted, as it is axiomatic that a court considering an unlimited civil matter is empowered to determine all such questions.

As to Defendant’s claim that Plaintiff has failed to plead the basic elements for breach of contract based on his admitted failure to perform the contract, the Court is not persuaded.  The Court considers only the properly plead factual allegations and liberally construes the same in making its determination.  The basic elements for breach: (1) existence of a valid contract; (2) plaintiff’s performance or excuse for non-performance; (3) defendant’s breach of contract; and (4) resulting damages.  (CACI, No. 303.)

Defendant argues that Plaintiff concedes a failure to pay the amount required in the note and therefore his complaint is defective.  In doing so, he effectively attacks element two – Plaintiff’s performance or excuse for non-performance. Plaintiff, however, pleads that he “has performed all obligations to defendant except those [he] was prevented or excused from performing.”  He also pleads that Defendant refused to accept the balance owed on the contract.  Given the foregoing, Plaintiff’s pleadings demonstrate the minimal showing required for purposes of this motion.

For all the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied.


Daunch v. Judy Jack et al                                             Case No. CU20-084434

The motion is continued on the Court’s own motion to September 2, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.  No appearances are required.

The matter is before the Court on Oakview’s motion for determination of good-faith settlement.  The Court is inclined to grant its motion, however, Oakview has failed to include in its declaration or supporting exhibits an approximate value of the cost waiver contemplated by the settlement agreement as seems to be required under the relevant case law.  (See e.g., West v. Superior Court (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 1625; Armstrong World Industries, Inc. v. Superior Court (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 951.)  Such information is necessary for the Court as part of its determination of “good faith” and assessment of the factors under Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488.

Oakview shall provide the Court with a declaration as to the value of the cost waiver by no later than August 19, 2022.


Discover Bank v. Sumner                                              Case No. CU22-086153

The motion for summary judgment is dropped from the Court’s calendar at the request of the moving party.  Plaintiff’s counsel filed a notice of settlement with the Court on July 15, 2022.  No appearances are required.


Mitchell v. Mitchell                                                       Case No. CU22-086295

Defendant’s motion to disqualify Plaintiff’s counsel is continued to August 19, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6, pursuant to the stipulation and agreement of the parties.  No appearances are required.


Bow v. Cebridge Telecom et al                                      Case No. TCU21-7785

The application for admission pro hac vice is granted as prayed.  No appearances are required.

-------------------------------------------------------

THE COURT HAS CREATED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS FOR REQUESTING ORAL ARGUMENT.  PLEASE SEE BELOW.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, ARE HIGHLY RECOMMENDED TO wear a face covering. (See Executive Order 205).

You may also appear via VIDEO by arranging A REMOTE appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and thereafter notify the clerk’s office BY EMAIL AT OA@NCCOURT.NET OR BY CALLING (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing.  If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling.  Any argument is limited to five minutes.  California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Unless the court orders otherwise, the court does not provide court reporters for civil law and motion hearings and case management conferences at the court's expense.  Any litigant who wants a record of a law and motion matter or a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense.  Local Rule 10.00.3B.


Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

July 29, 2022   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

THE COURT HAS CREATED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS FOR REQUESTING ORAL ARGUMENT.  PLEASE SEE BELOW.

 

Elder v. Oyung                                                              Case No. CL19-084361

Plaintiff’s motion for additional discovery is granted as prayed.  Defendant is ordered to provide answers to all of the following: (1) form interrogatories 15.1, 17.1, and 50.1; (2) special interrogatories 4 through 23; and (3) request for production of documents 6 through 24.  The discovery deadline is hereby extended to August 12, 2022, and all responses to the above-noted discovery items must be provided no later than close of business on that date. 

Having considered and granted Plaintiff’s motion for additional discovery, the Court does not consider or address Plaintiff’s alternative request to remove the present litigation from economic litigation at this time.  Trial dates remain as presently set.  No appearances are required.


Gould v. PHH Mortgage et al                                        Case No. CU21-085398

Defendants have filed three separate discovery motions that are presently before the Court, to wit: (1) a motion to compel responses to special interrogatories set one; (2) a motion to compel responses to request for production of documents set one; and (3) a motion to deem requests for admissions admitted.  As to each, Defendants separately seek monetary sanctions.  The Court notes there have not been any oppositions filed by Plaintiff as to any the above-referenced motions.  The Court further notes that Plaintiff is self-represented, his counsel having been relieved by order of the Court on or about February 18, 2022.

Defendants have made the requisite showings that discovery requests were timely propounded, the time for response has elapsed, and no answers, documents, requests for extensions, or other responses have been received.  All of Defendants’ motions are thus granted.  Monetary sanctions are awarded as to each motion, but are, however, reduced as discussed below. 

Plaintiff’s failure to respond as to each of the above-described discovery requests constitutes “misuse of the discovery process” within the meaning of Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 2023.010(d) (“[f]ailing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery”), thereby subjecting Plaintiff to monetary sanctions.  (Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 2023.030(a) [“The court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process … pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct”]; Department of Forestry & Fire Protection v. Howell (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 154, 193 disapproved of on other grounds in Presbyterian Camp & Conference Centers, Inc. v. Superior Court (2021) 12 Cal.5th 493.)

Defendants bring their discovery motions as separate pleadings and request $750.00 in fees/costs as to each for a total of $2,250.00.  As a preliminary matter, the Court finds no reason that said motions could not have been filed jointly as part of one motion since they arise out of requests made at identical times.  The Court finds the amount of sanctions requested are unreasonable given the pleadings, the complexity of the issues briefed, and the contents of the supporting declarations.  Monetary sanctions are awarded as to each motion in the amount of $265.00 for attorney’s fees and $60.00 for filing fees.  Defendants are awarded the combined total of $975.00 for all three motions. No appearances are required.


Murray v. McLaughlin                                                 Case No. CU21-086081

The hearing on Defendant’s motion for change of venue is continued to August 19, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.  On July 25, 2022, Defendant’s counsel submitted a declaration indicating she needs additional time to file a reply brief in response to Plaintiff’s opposition.  Plaintiff’s counsel has indicated she has no opposition to a continuance for those purposes.  No appearances are required.


Staves v. Larson                                                            Case No. UD21-00092

Defendant’s motion to set aside the default judgment is granted in part and denied in part.  For the reasons set forth more fully below, pursuant to Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 473(b) and for good cause shown, the Court sets aside the prior dismissal entered on April 18, 2022, as well as the amended default judgment entered on April 11, 2022. The previously entered default is not vacated.  (Jonson v. Weinstein (1967) 249 Cal.App.2d 954, 958.) 

Defendant’s request for an order directing Plaintiff to immediately pay him $21,000.00 in connection with his unrelated decedent estate matter is denied as it is in excess of the Court’s jurisdiction in an unlawful detainer matter.  The Court also notes its concerns as to whether the summary nature of unlawful detainer proceedings would allow for damages based on theft of personal property.  (See Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 1174.)

The Court has jurisdiction to hear Defendant’s motion.

Plaintiff argues as a preliminary matter that the Court is without jurisdiction to hear the present motion.  Plaintiff cites to Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 581(e) and Gogri v. Jack in the Box (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 255, in support of her position. Plaintiff’s argument on this point is contrary to case law and the express provisions of Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 473(b). 

The general rule that a court lacks jurisdiction to enter further orders once a matter is dismissed is not in dispute.  (See Wells v. Marina City Properties, Inc. (1981) 29 Cal.3d 781, 784.)  Wells affirmed a Plaintiff’s broad right to voluntarily dismiss and indicated “a trial court would thereafter lack jurisdiction to enter further orders in the dismissed action.”  Plaintiff’s seemingly sweeping intimation that all jurisdiction is lost is, however, not supported in case law or statute.  Case law admits of numerous exceptions to that general rule.  (See e.g., Shapell Industries, Inc. v. Superior Court (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 1101, 1108 [Court retains jurisdiction for the limited purpose of costs and attorney’s fees]; Eichenbaum v. Alon (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 967, 976 [court has jurisdiction for post-judgment motion for sanctions]; Pittman v. Beck Park Apartments Ltd. (2018) 20 Cal.App.5th 1009, 1024 [post-dismissal consideration of a vexatious litigant motion is proper].  Further, Plaintiff’s argument runs counter to the plain language of Section 473(b) under which Defendant seeks relief.  That section reads in pertinent part:

“The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.”

Relief from dismissal is expressly contemplated under Section 473(b).  Thus, the Court’s consideration of Defendant’s motion is not in excess of the Court’s jurisdiction.

The dismissal entered on April 18, 2022, and the amended default judgment entered on April 11, 2022, are hereby vacated.

As a general rule, due process requires notice to the defaulting defendant of both the type and amount of the relief sought.  (Finney v. Gomez (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 527, 538.)  Our California Supreme Court sitting in Bank has said the following with respect to notices in the default context: 

“We conclude that due process requires notice to defendants, whether they default by inaction or by willful obstruction, of the potential consequences of a refusal to pursue their defense.” 

(Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 829.)  The high court’s ultimate conclusion with respect to default judgments was broad reaching:  “We conclude that in all default judgments the demand sets a ceiling on recovery.”  (Id. at 824.)  Other courts have described the ceiling discussed in Greenup as jurisdictional in nature such that a contrary judgment is facially void.  (Yeung v. Soos (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 576, 582 [“a default judgment is void when the damages are in excess of the damages specified in the complaint or the statement of damages”]; David S. Karton, A Law Corp v. Dougherty (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 133, 150[“section 580 is an unqualified limit on the jurisdiction of courts entering default judgments”].)  It is axiomatic that a void judgment may be challenged at any time.  (Yeung, supra, 119 Cal.App.4th at 582.)

The Court, considering a motion to set aside under Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 473(b) is guided by the fundamental considerations of due process articulated in Greenup.  Section 473(b) provides that the Court may “upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party … from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.”

Here, it is undisputed by the Parties in this matter that Plaintiff filed her April 1, 2022, ex parte application to enforce the settlement agreement and enter judgment without giving notice to the Defendant (the “Application”).  (Plaintiff’s Opposition, Pg. 9, Lines 13-18 [“Plaintiff notified the Court that Plaintiff did not give Defendant notice of the Ex Parte Application to Enforce the Settlement Agreement and Enter Judgment where Defendant waived notice in the Stipulation …”].)  Plaintiff argues in her opposition that she was under no obligation to notice Defendant of her Application in light of the stipulation for entry of judgment filed with the Court on or about December 6, 2022 (the “Stipulation”).

The Stipulation included, in addition to approximately four (4) additional pages of recitals and terms, the following language relevant to the present motion:

“See attached 4 pgs.  If all terms of this agreement are met, no writ will issue or judgment enter[ed].  If all/any terms are not met, then a writ will issue and judgment enter[ed] for immediate eviction with no further notice or hearing.”

The above-referenced four (4) pages of attachments had various recitals, provisions of the agreement, and made reference to Plaintiff paying to Defendant, on April 18, 2022, the $21,000.00 owing to him under an unrelated decedent estate matter.  No part of the Stipulation contemplated that Defendant would, under any circumstances, forfeit his inheritance as a consequence of its violation.  Defendant was understandably surprised by the Court’s amended judgment, and the prior stipulation waiving notice cannot be construed, as Plaintiff urges, to waive notice of a proposed amended judgment that was outside of the terms of the settlement.

For the foregoing reasons, both the prior dismissal entered on April 18, 2022, as well as the amended default judgment entered on April 11, 2022, are hereby set aside.


Alvarado v. Rees                                                            Case No. CU20-085131

In light of the tentative ruling below and to afford counsel additional time to prepare to argue the matter, the hearing on the motion for summary judgment is continued on the Court’s own motion to August 3, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. in Department 6.

There are presently two matters before the Court: (1) Defendant Sugar Bowl’s (“Sugar Bowl”) motion for summary judgment as to Plaintiff’s complaint and the three cross-complaints filed by Jason Rees (“Rees”), Nyaco, and Summit Restaurant and Bar (“Summit”); and (2) Defendant Summit’s motion for joinder in the same.  

For the reasons stated below, Sugar Bowl’s motion for summary judgment is granted as to Plaintiff’s operative complaint as well as all of the derivative cross-complaints against it.  Plaintiff’s evidentiary objections are overruled in part and sustained in part.  Summit’s motion for joinder is denied.

(1)   Background

This cases arises from a personal injury dispute involving then-four-year-old Plaintiff, Julian Alvarado.  Plaintiff alleges he was injured when struck by a vehicle while snow-sledding with his family while in parking lot owned by Sugar Bowl.  (Complaint ¶¶ 5-6; Defendant’s Separate Statement of Material Facts (“SSUMF”) ¶ 2) On the date in question, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant/Cross-Defendant Rees was driving his SUV through the Sugar Bowl Parking lot and struck Plaintiff with said vehicle while Plaintiff was engaged in snow-sledding activities.

(2)   Sugar Bowl’s Motion for Summary Judgment

Sugar Bowl advances three separate legal bases in support of its motion for summary judgment as to Plaintiff’s complaint: (1) Ca. Civil Code Section 846 is an absolute bar to liability since Plaintiff was engaged in recreational activity on the subject property;       (2) primary assumption of risk bars Plaintiff’s claim; and (3) no duty to warn exists because the risk was open and obvious.  As to the three indemnity cross-complaints, Sugar Bowl moves for summary judgment on the basis that liability is wholly derivative and a grant of summary judgment as to the substantive causes of action in Plaintiff’s complaint on one or more of the grounds listed above precludes liability on an indemnity basis.

As to Plaintiff’s Complaint, the Court has not yet reached a tentative on whether Section 846’s recreational use immunity bars Plaintiff’s claims and invites further argument from counsel as indicated below.  As to the second claim, the Court agrees that primary assumption of risk bar Plaintiff’s claims and would grant Sugar Bowl’s motion on that basis.  And as to the claim that summary judgment should be granted based on the risk being “open and obvious,” the Court is not persuaded and does not grant the motion on that basis.  As to the indemnity cross-complaints, they are wholly derivative – being based on Sugar Bowl’s liability on Plaintiff’s primary causes of action.  As such, Sugar Bowl’s motion for summary judgment is also granted as to Rees’s, Nyaco’s, and Summit’s cross-complaints.

A.    Does recreational use immunity under Ca. Civil Code § 846 bars Plaintiff’s claims against Sugar Bowl?

“Section 846 establishes limited liability on the part of a private landowner for injuries sustained by another from recreational use of the land.”  (Ornelas v. Randolph (1993) 4 Cal.4th 1095, 1099.)  There are two elements that operate as a precondition to this immunity and some exceptions to the rule.  Section 846 reads in pertinent part:

“(a) An owner of any estate or any other interest in real property, whether possessory or nonpossessory, owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for any recreational purpose or to give any warning of hazardous conditions, uses of structures, or activities on those premises to persons entering for a recreational purpose, except as provided in this section.”

The Ornelas court distills the immunity preconditions described above as follows: (1) the defendant must be the owner or the estate or other interest in real property, whether it be possessory or nonpossessory; and (2) the plaintiff’s injury resulted from the “entry or use [of the ‘premises’] for any recreational purposes.”  (Ornelas, supra, 4 Cal.4th at 1100.)

Where the above preconditions are established, exceptions to this express limitation on liability exist under the following conditions: (1) the landowner “willfully or maliciously fails to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use, structure or activity”;             (2) permission to enter for a recreational purpose “is granted for a consideration”; or (3) “the landowner expressly invites rather than merely permits the user to come on the premises.”  (Id. at 1099-1100; Ca. Civil Code § 846(d).)

We examine first the preconditions.

i.        Despite Plaintiff’s contentions, there is no reasonable factual dispute as to the two required preconditions for immunity.

It is effectively undisputed that Plaintiff sustained his injuries while in the parking lot of 22002 Donner Pass Road, Soda Springs, California (hereafter the “DSL parking lot”) on December 31, 2015, and that the DSL parking lot is owned by Sugar Bowl.  (SSUMF ¶¶ 1-2; 10; 18-22.)  Plaintiff indicates there is a dispute as to who owns the land in question, stating “[i]t is not clear who owns the land in question” in response to both SSUMF ¶ 1 and 10.  Plaintiff points the Court to the Deposition of Stewart Wells contained in counsel’s declaration in opposition, whose referenced statements do not speak to a dispute as to ownership of the DSL lot, but instead, at most, only to uncertainty as to the precise boundaries between Nyaco and Sugar Bowl’s property.  (Declaration of Gail Richardson, Exhibit 3, Deposition of Stewart Wells at p. 27:21-25; 28-4-10; see also Plaintiff’s UMF ¶ 55, citing to the same deposition transcript passages.)

SSUMF ¶ 1 clearly defines 22002 Donner Pass Road, Soda Springs, California as the DSL Parking Lot; Plaintiff does not contest Defendant’s definition of that address as such.  And in SSUMF ¶ 2, the DSL parking lot is identified as being owned by Sugar Bowl; Plaintiff offers no dispute to SSUMF ¶ 2.  Further, Plaintiff’s own complaint describes him as being present in the DSL parking lot on the date of the incident and states, that at the same time, Plaintiff was struck by Rees.  (Complaint, Pg. 2 ¶¶ 5-6.)

Plaintiff nonetheless argues that “there is a key factual dispute” because it is “not clear on whose property this incident actually occurred.”  (Plaintiff’s Opposition, Pg. 5, Lines 12-17.)  Counsel then argues that it is entirely possible that Plaintiff was on both properties during the subject incident; the second property being the gas station property located next to the DSL parking lot.  (Id. at Pg. 10, Lines 14-26; UMF ¶ 49.)  Even if this latter contention were true, that would not abrogate the protections Section 846 offers Sugar Bowl; it is effectively irrelevant to the Court’s determination here.  Counsel cites to no case for the proposition that an accident occurring on two separate properties while being used for recreational purposes somehow removes the protections at issue. 

Further, as pointed out by Defendant in its Reply brief, Plaintiff’s theory of liability as to Sugar Bowl is effectively that it owed a duty to Plaintiff on its property and failed to uphold that duty.  Such duty can only arise if there is a nexus to Sugar Bowl.  Rees was not an employee, invitee, or other Sugar Bowl affiliated individual, nor was one in involved.  (SSUMF ¶ 26.)  Plaintiff’s theory of liability must be predicated on Sugar Bowl’s ownership of the property and a failure to uphold a duty it thereby owed Plaintiff.  Here, Plaintiff cannot defend against Sugar Bowl’s motion by arguing there is a dispute as to who owns the property in the manner it does.  If Sugar Bowl owns the property, then Section 846 potentially applies.  If it doesn’t (the other option implied by Plaintiff), then no Section 846 analysis is even necessary as there is no coherent alternate theory for Sugar Bowl’s liability to Plaintiff.

The second precondition for Section 846 is that the Plaintiff’s injury must have resulted from the entry or use of the premises for any “recreational purpose.”  Sledding clearly falls under the ambit of “recreational activity” cognizable under Section 846 and this is not disputed by either party.  Both the statute and Ornelas command the same conclusion.  (See id. at subdivision (b); Ornelas, supra, 4 Cal.4th at 1100-1102 [child playing with hand-held toy near old farm equipment satisfies Section 846].) 

Plaintiff argues that it is unclear whether Plaintiff “entered Sugar Bowl’s property for the purpose of recreation.”  (Plaintiff’s Opposition, Pg. 10, Lines 5-21.)  The protections under Section 846 apply when injured parties enter or use the premises for “any recreational purposes.”  (Ornelas, supra, 4 Cal.4th at 1100.)  Thus, whether Plaintiff initially entered on another property or first entered for a non-recreational purpose is irrelevant so long as he used Sugar Bowl’s property for recreational purposes and the injury resulted during such time.

Again, Plaintiff’s own complaint describes him as being present in the DSL parking lot on the date of the incident and states that, at the time present, he was struck by Rees.  (Complaint, Pg. 2 ¶¶ 5-6.)  That the accident occurred while Plaintiff was sledding on DSL is not in reasonable dispute.  (SSUMF ¶¶ 1-2; 10; 18-22 [accident occurred in the DSL parking lot when Plaintiff was struck by Rees and Plaintiff was found with his sled contemporaneously with the accident].)  Further in SSUMF ¶ 27, Defendant contends, and Plaintiff does not dispute, that it had no knowledge that Plaintiff and his family came into the DSL parking lot for snow-play activities.  Inherent in that factual concession by Plaintiff is that he was on the DSL parking lot for snow-play activities.  If Plaintiff disputed that contention, it should have indicated as much as it did elsewhere.  (See also SSUMF ¶ 24; UMF ¶¶ 45-48 [Defendant offers that Sugar Bowl did not invite Plaintiff or his parents onto DSL property and Plaintiff only disputes that fact as to his mother, who is admitted in UMF ¶¶ 45-48 to have remained in the family car before the incident occurred].)

ii.      Neither of the first two exceptions to Section 846’s protections apply here.

As discussed above, there are three exceptions to the express limitation on liability.  The first two exceptions require little comment.

Did Sugar Bowl grant permission for Plaintiff to enter for “consideration”?  No; the evidentiary record does not support this contention and Plaintiff does not dispute this in its response to the SSUMF.  (SSUMF ¶ 25.)  Plaintiff’s argument in a footnote that some form of cognizable non-traditional consideration existed here by virtue of Summit’s lease with Sugar Bowl is unpersuasive as there is no indication Summit actually invited Plaintiff onto the premises or even that he was there to patronize Summit’s business.  

Second, was Plaintiff expressly invited onto the premises by Sugar Bowl?  No; there is absolutely no dispute on this point.  (SSUMF ¶¶ 27 [undisputed that Sugar Bowl did not know that Plaintiff and his family were using the DSL parking lot for snow play activities]; 24 [undisputed that Sugar Bowl did not invite either Plaintiff or his father onto the DSL property].  Mother entered the DSL parking lot only sometime after the accident.  (UMF ¶¶ 45-48.)

iii.                The application of the willful misconduct exception.

The more difficult question is whether the final potential exception to Section 846 applies.  Did Sugar Bowl “willful[ly] or malicious[ly] fail[] to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use, structure or activity”?  (See Ca. Civil Code § 846(d)(1).)  The type of “willful or malicious” disregard at issue here refers to an actor who “has intentionally done an act of an unreasonable character in disregard of a risk known to him or so obvious that he must be taken to have been aware of it, and so great as to make it highly probable that harm would follow.”  (Calvillo-Silva v. Home Grocery (1998) 19 Cal.4th 714, 728, overruled on other grounds, Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 827, 853, fn. 19.)

As the court explains in Manuel v. Pacific Gas & Electronic Co. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 927, 939, “willful and [malicious] misconduct is separate and distinct from negligence” and even gross negligence. “[W]illful misconduct is not marked by a mere absence of care.”  (Id. at 939-940.)  Willful misconduct involves a “more positive intent actually to harm another or to do an act with a positive, active, and absolute disregard of its consequences.”  (Id. at 940.)

In raising this potential exception to Section 846, it is incumbent upon Plaintiff to “specify the particular acts upon which the willful misconduct of [Sugar Bowl] is charged.”  (Charpentier v. Von Geldern (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 101, 114 [conclusory allegations in the pleading are insufficient]; Bartless v. Jackson (1936 13 Cal.App.3d 435, 437.)  A defendant’s summary judgment motion must by necessity include a test of the sufficiency of the complaint, “and is, in effect, a motion for judgment on the pleadings.”  (Charpentier, supra, 191 Cal.App.3d at 114.)  Chapentier, like Manuel, supra, notes that there must be specific facts establishing three elements in this type of circumstance: (1) knowledge of the peril; (2) knowledge of the probability of injury; and (3) conscious failure to act to avoid the peril.  (Charpentier, supra, 191 Cal.App.3d at 113; Manual, supra, 173 Cal.App.4th at 945; see also Morgan v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. (1974) 37 Cal.App.3d 1006, 1012.)  Plaintiff’s pleadings are silent on this particular point; no allegations are offered in the complaint that any or all defendants acted with the requisite willful and malicious conduct.

Plaintiff points out that that the parking lot was used by sledders and that Sugar Bowl knew of such use but failed to include any cautionary signs.  (Plaintiff’s Statement of Undisputed Material Facts (“UMF”) ¶¶ 59-60.)  Plaintiff concedes that Sugar Bowl did not know Plaintiff and his family were using its property for snow-play activities.  (SSUMF ¶ 27.)  Sugar Bowl counters that it was its regular practice to include such signs.  (SSUMF ¶¶ 28.)  Plaintiff further contends that Sugar Bowl was aware that cars and semi-trucks used the subject lot.  (UMF ¶¶ 58-62; 64-66.)  Plaintiff ultimately argues that Sugar Bowl “knew a sledding accident was highly probable” because the resort knew the area was popular for sledding, knew that vehicles used the parking lot, and failed to take remedial action or post signs.

On the other hand, Plaintiff offers as an undisputed set of facts that no vehicles drove through the area where the children were playing prior to the subject incident and notes that when the children were sledding down the snowbank, they did so into the parking lot in an area that was approximately 30 to 40 feet away from any parked cars.  (UMF ¶¶ 39-40.)  Further, to gain access to Sugar Bowl property where the accident occurred, Plaintiff had to climb a 12-foot-high snow berm.  (SSUMF ¶ 8-9.)  And, of note, nothing in the record indicates the existence of a prior accident, injury, or incident related to these activities on Sugar Bowl’s property, or the resort’s knowledge thereof.  (See Lostritto, supra, 73 Cal.App.3d at 745 [probability of injury and prior injuries occurring are relevant considerations in looking at all the circumstances].)

The question appears to boil down to this: Does knowledge by Sugar Bowl that some people used an operational parking lot for sledding (with no knowledge of incidents related thereto), combined with the resort’s alleged failure to take remedial action, constitute willful and malicious misconduct?  The Court has not presently reached a tentative view and invites further argument from the parties.

B.     Primary assumption of risk doctrine bars Plaintiff’s claims against Sugar Bowl.

Sugar Bowl’s second claim is based on primary assumption of risk doctrine.  The doctrine for our present purposes can be summed up as follows:

“In cases involving 'primary assumption of risk'—where, by virtue of the nature of the activity and the parties' relationship to the activity, the defendant owes no legal duty to protect the plaintiff from the particular risk of harm that caused the injury—the doctrine continues to operate as a complete bar to the plaintiff's recovery.” 

(Parsons v. Crown Disposal Co. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 456.)  The Court went on to say where the parties involved are “independent actors, separately pursuing their own activities—a defendant generally has no duty to avoid increasing the risks inherent in a plaintiff’s activity.”  (Id. at 482.)

As a threshold consideration, we must consider whether the doctrine is, as a matter of law, applicable to the act of snow sledding.  Plaintiff insists the doctrine categorically does not apply to a four-year-old snow sledding and that it only applies to the very “limited context of active sports.” (Plaintiff’s Opposition, Pg. 13, Lines 15-19.) (Emphasis original.)  Sugar Bowl insists the doctrine is far broader and includes “all recreational activities involving inherent risks.” (Sugar Bowl’s Reply Memorandum, Pg. 5, Lines 9-20.) (Emphasis original.)

In Nalwa v. Cedar Fair, L.P. (2012) 55 Cal.4th 1148, our California Supreme Court took up the issue and rejected the strict interpretation offered by the Plaintiff in our present case.  It stated:

“[T]he primary assumption of risk doctrine is not limited to activities classified as sports, but applies as well to other recreational activities ‘involving an inherent risk of injury to voluntary participants ... where the risk cannot be eliminated without altering the fundamental nature of the activity.’  [Citations omitted.]

 

The primary assumption of risk doctrine rests on a straightforward policy foundation: the need to avoid chilling vigorous participation in or sponsorship of recreational activities by imposing a tort duty to eliminate or reduce the risks of harm inherent in those activities. It operates on the premise that imposing such a legal duty ‘would work a basic alteration—or cause abandonment’ of the activity.”

(Id. at 1156).  As examples of the doctrine in action, the Nalwa court presents numerous examples: (1) recognizing tort liability for pitchers hitting batters in the game of baseball would deter “essential part of the sport” (Avila v. Citrus Community College Dist. (2006) 38 Cal.4th 148, 165); (2) golfer liability for missed hits would “deter players from enjoying the sport” (Dilger v. Moyles (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 1452, 1455); and imposing tort liability for negligence in towing water-skiers might have “a generally deleterious effect on the nature of the sport of waterskiing as a whole.” (Ford v. Gouin (1992) 3 Cal.4th 339, 345.)  In the context of that discussion, the Nalwa court remarked that the “doctrine’s parameters should be drawn according to that goal.” (Nalwa, supra, 55 Cal.4th at 1157.)  Specifically that imposition of tort liability should not be occasioned where it would work “a basic alteration—or cause abandonment” of the activity.  (Id. at 1156.)

Defendant insists, and the Court agrees, that snow sledding is an activity that is properly within the doctrine of primary assumption of risk as defined by the court in Nalwa.  It falls within the ambit of a recreational activity involving inherent risks that cannot be eliminated without altering the fundamental nature of the activity.

But the analysis in the present case is not perfectly analogous to those discussed above.  The difference flows from the lack of relationship between the Plaintiff and Sugar Bowl in this instance.  The case of Parsons v. Crown Disposal Co. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 456, cited above, is illustrative.

In Parsons, the California Supreme Court dealt with the issue of primary assumption of risk in the context of a case where a garbage truck driver drove past a horseback rider.  The rider was thrown from the horse and suffered injuries.  The high court noted that the two did not stand in any sort of organized relationship with one another.  Under these types circumstances, the Parsons court concluded “defendants generally [do not] owe a duty not to increase the risk inherent in whatever activity plaintiffs happen to be pursuing.”  (Id. at 482.)

Another case germane to the discussion is Calhoon v. Lewis (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 108.  Calhoon is a primary assumption of risk case that involved a skateboarder who injured himself on a homeowner’s property by virtue of falling on a pipe on their property.  The court reasoned that the Calhoon homeowners stood in an analogous position to the truck driver in Parsons.  It noted that the homeowners neither held out their driveway as a safe place to skateboard or that it was an appropriate place to do so.  Calhoon then went on to state:

“Whereas it would be reasonable to require a skateboarding park owner to take steps to minimize the risks of skateboarding injuries, it would not be reasonable to require the same steps of residential property owners.  Absent facts showing a residential property owner is holding out his or her property for skateboarding use, an owner does not have the duty to refrain from increasing risks to a skateboarder.”

(Id. at 117-118.)  Here, there is nothing in the evidentiary record to suggest that Sugar Bowl encouraged or otherwise held out the DSL parking lot as a place for sledding use. The evidence on that point is, when viewed in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, that Sugar Bowl was aware that people utilized the area for sledding.  Moreover, it is undisputed that Sugar Bowl did not know Plaintiff and his family were using the DSL parking lot for said activities.  (SSUMF ¶ 27.)  Whereas it would be reasonable perhaps to require a sledding park owner to take steps to minimize the risks of sledding, it would not be reasonable to require the same steps of a ski resort in connection with a parking lot.

Sugar Bowl suggests that the Court must analyze the question of whether there is “material evidence that Sugar Bowl did something to unreasonably increase the inherent risks of the activity.”  (Sugar Bowl’s Reply Memorandum, Pg. 5, Lines 24-28.)  The Court is not confident that analysis is required given Parsons and Calhoon.  Again, it is clear that Plaintiff and Sugar Bowl did not stand in the type of relationship required to impose a duty on Sugar Bowl to refrain from increasing the risks to Plaintiff.

Given all of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the doctrine of primary assumption of risk bars Plaintiff’s claims against Sugar Bowl.

C.     There is a reasonable factual dispute on the question of “open and obvious” risk.

Sugar Bowl also argues that the danger was so open and obvious that it had no duty to warn Plaintiff of that risk.  The exception provides that “if a danger is so obvious that a person could reasonably be expected to see it, the condition itself serves as a warning, and the landowner is under no further duty to remedy or warn of that condition.”  (Jacobs v. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Co. (2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 438, 447; Zuniga v. Cherry Avenue Auction, Inc. (2021) 61 Cal.App.5th 980, 993-994.)

Plaintiff argues that the “open and obvious [doctrine] has been subsumed into comparative negligence.”  Plaintiff seems to insist that the doctrine of “open and obvious” danger is categorically an improper subject of a motion for summary judgment.  (Plaintiff’s Opposition, Pg. 16, Lines 3-10, citing Beauchamp v. Los Gatos Golf Course (1969) 273 Cal.App.2d 20.)  Defendant counters that this is an improper rendering of Beauchamp and insists its claim is proper for consideration under a motion for summary judgment.

The Court is not persuaded by Plaintiff’s interpretation of Beauchamp to the extent he suggests that the “open and obvious” doctrine cannot serve as a basis for a summary judgment. Numerous cases have applied this doctrine in this context.  (See e.g., Jacobs v. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Co. (2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 438 [considering and upholding the trial court’s grant of summary judgment based on the “open and obvious” doctrine].) 

Nonetheless, the Court, having considered Sugar Bowl’s contentions on this point, finds that a reasonable factual dispute exists as to whether the risk at issue in this case was “open and obvious.”  In its UMF, Plaintiff offers that there were no cars within 30-40 feet of the sledding area, and that no vehicles drove through the area while the children were playing.  (UMF ¶ 39-40.)  Plaintiff further claims that there are no signs in the area warning the public against sledding activities.  (UMF ¶ 60.)  Sugar Bowl counters that it was its regular practice to erect warning signs alerting the public that the DSL parking lot was private and not to be used by the public.  (SSUMF ¶ 28.)

Given the foregoing, there do appear to be legitimate factual issues to be decided by a jury as to the “open and obvious” doctrine. Sugar Bowl’s motion is denied on this basis.

D.    Sugar Bowl’s motion for summary judgment is granted as to the three derivative cross-complaints.

When a court sustains a motion for summary judgment, or otherwise makes a finding that a defendant has no liability to an injured plaintiff, such provides a complete defense to a cross-complaint for equitable indemnity.  (Allis-Chalmer Corp. v. Superior Court (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 1155; see also Children’s Hosp. v. Sedgwick (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1780 [previous finding that a party is not at fault precludes an action in equitable indemnity action by a party that settled with plaintiff in the previous lawsuit before it reached judgment].)

The Allis-Chalmer court confirmed that where a defendant is not jointly and severally liable to a plaintiff, it cannot be liable on a cause of action for indemnity brought by another defendant by means of a cross-complaint.  (Allis-Chalmer, supra, 168 Cal.App.3d at 1158-1159).

The Court, having granted Sugar Bowl’s motion for summary judgment as to Plaintiff’s complaint, must also grant it as to the derivative cross-complaints, which by necessity must fall under the rationale articulated by the court in Allis-Chalmer.  There is nothing about the indemnity cross-complaints in the present matter that compels a different conclusion and Sugar Bowl’s motion is granted as to Rees’s, Nyaco’s, and Summit’s cross-complaints.

(3)   Plaintiff’s Evidentiary Objections are Sustained in Part and Overruled in Part

Plaintiff objects to two statements made in Sugar Bowl’s SSUMF, specifically SSUSM ¶¶ 11 and 29.  As to both statements, Plaintiff objects on identical bases, to wit: that the statement is based on an improper conclusion, improper speculation, “insufficient foundation to qualify as an expert,” and as an improper lay witness opinion.  (Ca. Evidence Code §§ 801, 803, 702, 820, 801, and 800.)  Plaintiff’s objection as to SSUMF ¶ 29 is overruled.  Plaintiff’s objection SSUMF ¶ 11 is sustained in part.

SSUMF ¶ 11 reads as follows:

“While Hector Alvarado claims that the SUV ran over [Plaintiff’s] head, that is unlikely given that Julian was walking shortly after the incident, was treated in the emergency department and promptly released to his parents, and he appeared smiling and happy at his January 2016 doctor’s appointment.  Hector Alvarado testified that Julian Alvarado was released from the emergency department the same day as the incident, and joined the family at their hotel in Reno over the New Year’s holiday.”

As to the contention that it is “unlikely [the SUV ran over Plaintiff’s head] given that Julian was walking shortly after the incident [and for the other reasons stated],” that statement lacks foundation and constitutes improper lay witness opinion.  The objections on those grounds are sustained.  The objections to the balance of SSUMF ¶ 11 (concerning Hector Alvarado’s testimony that Plaintiff was released from the emergency and joined the family) is overruled.

(4)   Summit’s Motion for Joinder in Sugar Bowl’s Motion for Summary Judgment

As noted above, Summit joins in Sugar Bowl’s motion for summary judgment by notice of joinder and joinder motion.  It relies on the identical bases advanced by Sugar Bowl and incorporates Sugar Bowl’s SSUMF ¶¶ 1-13; 15-23; and 28-30.  Notably, Summit does not provide its own separate statement of material facts.  This procedural failure is dispositive.

Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(b)(1) provides that a motion for summary judgment “shall be supported by affidavits, declarations, admissions, [etc.]” and also includes the following pertinent language:

“The supporting papers shall include a separate statement setting forth plainly and concisely all material facts that the moving party contends are undisputed. […]  The failure to comply with this requirement of a separate statement may in the court’s discretion constitute a sufficient ground for denying the motion.”

While a party can join in another party’s motion for summary judgment, they must nevertheless still comply with the other substantive portions of Section 437c identified above, specifically inclusion of a separate statement of undisputed material facts.  (Frazee v. Seely (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 627, 635-636).  The Frazee court dealt with a situation where one set of parties properly filed a motion for summary judgment supported with a separate statement.  A separate group of parties filed a “simple notice of joinder in the motion, but did not file their own separate statement.”  (Id. at 636.)  The court stated: “While this form of joinder may be sufficient for some purposes [citations omitted], it is not sufficient for purposes of the summary judgment statute.” The court, pointing to the clear language of the statute, stated: “Each moving party shall support their motion for summary judgment with a separate statement.”  (Id., emphasis added.)

Given the foregoing, Summit’s motion is denied.  The Court notes that during the pendency of Sugar Bowl’s motion and Summit’s joinder, Plaintiff has, effective July 11, 2022, dismissed Summit from the lawsuit with prejudice.

THE COURT HAS CREATED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS FOR REQUESTING ORAL ARGUMENT.  PLEASE SEE BELOW.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, ARE CURRENTLY REQUIRED TO wear a face covering. (See Executive Order 205).

You may also appear via VIDEO by arranging A REMOTE appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and thereafter notify the clerk’s office BY EMAIL AT OA@NCCOURT.NET OR BY CALLING (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing.  If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling.  Any argument IN CONNECTION WITH THE SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION IS limited to TEN MINUTES PER SIDE.  aNY ARGUMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE JOINDER IS LIMITED TO five minutes PER SIDE.  California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Unless the court orders otherwise, the court does not provide court reporters for civil law and motion hearings and case management conferences at the court's expense.  Any litigant who wants a record of a law and motion matter or a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense.  Local Rule 10.00.3B.


Affordable Urban Living v. Brogie et al              Case No. CL0000014

The court has been advised by the clerk that notice of the June 23, 2022 decision by Judge Pro Tem Bradrick vacating the default and default judgments as to both Brian and Rachel Brogie was solely given to the Sheriff, not to Plaintiff.  Under these circumstances, Plaintiff’s July 8, 2022 motion for reconsideration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008 is deemed timely filed.  That motion is granted as to Defendant Brian Brogie.  Plaintiff was not properly noticed of Defendant Brian Brogie’s June 21, 2022 motion to set aside the default and judgment.   As such, the June 23, 2022 order will be vacated as to this Defendant.  Defendant Brian Brogie’s answer to the complaint filed the same day is stricken.

Defendant Rachel Brogie did not join Defendant Brian Brogie’s June 21, 2022 motion and no relief was sought on her behalf.  That being the case, it appears that relief should not have been granted to her.  That said, because the default and default judgment were vacated, Defendant Rachel Brogie is entitled to notice of the current motion relating to her interests before the court can act upon Plaintiff’s request.  The court continues the motion as to this defendant until August 26, 2022 at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Plaintiff must properly serve the instant motion on Defendant Rachel Brogie no later than August 12, 2022 and provide notice to her that it will be heard on the date and time indicated.  No appearances are required.


THE COURT HAS CREATED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS FOR REQUESTING ORAL ARGUMENT.  PLEASE SEE BELOW.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, ARE CURRENTLY REQUIRED TO wear a face covering. (See Executive Order 205).

You may also appear via VIDEO by arranging A REMOTE appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and thereafter notify the clerk’s office BY EMAIL AT OA@NCCOURT.NET OR BY CALLING (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing.  If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling.  Any argument is limited to five minutes.  California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Unless the court orders otherwise, the court does not provide court reporters for civil law and motion hearings and case management conferences at the court's expense.  Any litigant who wants a record of a law and motion matter or a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense.  Local Rule 10.00.3B.


Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

July 22, 2022   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

THE COURT HAS CREATED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS FOR REQUESTING ORAL ARGUMENT.  PLEASE SEE BELOW.

Elder v. Oyung                                                              Case No. CL19-084361

No appearances are required.  The hearing on Plaintiff’s motion and the pre-trial conference are both continued on the Court’s own motion to July 29, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


Poomsawai v. Fox et al                                                Case No. CU19-084264

As explained below, Plaintiff’s motion for award of pre-judgment interest is granted as prayed in the amount of $41,655.55.  No appearances are required. 

The Court notes that Defendants, in their opposition to the motion, do not dispute that Plaintiffs are entitled to pre-judgment interest under Ca. Civil Code Section 3287(a).  Defendants concede, within the meaning of Section 3287(a), that the damages are “certain[] or capable of being made certain by calculation[.]”  And, further, they do not dispute the date of breach or the applicable rate of interest (10%) as contained in Section 3289.  Defendant’s sole contention in their opposition is that accretion of pre-judgment interest should effectively be tolled for a fourteen and one-half month period, between February 1, 2021, when trial was set and April 19, 2022, when jury trial commenced, due to trial delays attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Defendants offer no statute or case law in support of their proposition, instead arguing summarily only that “these unique circumstances … constitute good cause” to order aforesaid relief.  The Court can find no case in support of the proposition that Defendants are entitled to a tolling of pre-judgment due to delays attributable to delays in the availability of a trial court.  Further, there is no indication in the record that Plaintiffs unduly delayed prosecution of this matter as a litigation or other tactic such that denial or reduction of pre-judgment interest might be cognizable.  (See General Motors Corp. v. Devex Corp. (1983) 461 U.S. 648; see also see also Crystal Semiconductor Corp. v. TriTech Microelecs Int’l, Inc. (Fed. Cir 2001) 246 F.3d 1336, 1361-1362 [pre-judgment interest denied where evidence supported claim that delay of two years was a litigation tactic].

In this situation, the Court is obligated to impose pre-judgment interest in the full amount requested by Plaintiffs.  (Warren v. Kia Motors America, Inc. (2018) 30 Cal.App.5th 24, 43 [court has no discretion and must award pre-judgment interest upon request “from the first day there exists both a breach and a liquidated claim”].)  Even assuming the Court had the discretion to deny interest for good cause, the Court is not persuaded good cause is presented herein.  First, there has been no showing that Defendants demanded an immediate trial or opposed continuances of any of the trial dates.  Second, there was not an extraordinary delay in bringing this matter to trial.  The original trial date selected was December 15, 2020; the ultimate trial date was April 19, 2022.


Gopal v. Luther                                                             Case No. CU21-085321

The hearing on the order to show cause is continued to August 26, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that Defendants recently filed an appeal with respect to their previously denied motion to compel arbitration.  Defendants have concurrently filed a notice of stay and therein indicate that said appeal triggers an automatic stay of the proceedings pursuant to Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 916(a).

Counsel for both parties are ordered to provide supplemental briefing on the issue of the effect of any stay on this Court’s ability to hear and consider the preliminary injunction at issue during the pendency of the appeal.  All briefing is to be filed no later than August 12, 2022.  No appearances are required.


Koslin et al v. GV Development                                 Case No. CU21-085797

The hearing on Defendant Smith’s demurrer is continued to August 12, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6 to be heard concurrently with Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a second amended complaint.  The Court notes that Plaintiffs’ request to continue the demurrer as described above is noted and unopposed by Defendant Smith in his reply brief.  No appearances are required.


In re William H. Laws Trust                                          Case No. P22-17011

Counsel for Petitioners is ordered to file with the Court no later than July 29, 2022, a complete copy of the subpoena duces tecum at issue, including all attachments, instructions, other documents served on Deponent in connection with the request, and particularly any documents describing the scope of documents to be provided under the subpoena.  Presently, Petitioners’ moving papers include only the notice to consumer, an unexecuted proof of service, “Attachment 3,” and a summary of service.

Deponent appears to argue in connection with this matter that she has no documents responsive to Petitioners’ request.  The Court notes that Deponent does not appear to have executed and/or provided the required affidavit attesting to such.  Deponent is therefore ordered no later than July 29, 2022, to execute, file with the Court, and serve on opposing counsel, an affidavit under Ca. Evidence Code Section 1561 attesting to the status of records in her possession.

Counsel for Petitioners and Deponent are further ordered to meet and confer before the next hearing to discuss possible informal resolution of this discovery dispute.  The motion is continued for hearing until August 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  No appearances are required.


Kiggins v. Cirinos et al                                                  Case No. CU21-085875

The hearing on Plaintiff’s motion is continued on the Court’s own motion to August 19, 2022, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes Defendant submitted digital media in connection with his opposition, which purportedly contains videos from the Plaintiff’s deposition.  The Court has been unable to review the videos on the provided digital media device and requires Defendants, if they would like the Court to consider such as part of its opposition, to submit them in an alternate digital media format, e.g., USB storage device.  Defendant shall re-submit its digital media exhibits to the Court no later than August 5, 2022.  No appearances are required.


PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, ARE CURRENTLY REQUIRED TO wear a face covering. (See Executive Order 205).

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging such ZOOM appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and thereafter notify the clerk’s office BY EMAIL AT OA@NCCOURT.NET OR BY CALLING (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing.  If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling.  Any argument is limited to five minutes.  California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Unless the court orders otherwise, the court does not provide court reporters for civil law and motion hearings and case management conferences at the court's expense.  Any litigant who wants a record of a law and motion matter or a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense.  Local Rule 10.00.3B.


Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

July 15, 2022   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

THE COURT HAS CREATED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS FOR REQUESTING ORAL ARGUMENT.  PLEASE SEE BELOW.

 

In Re Wright, Laurel                                          Case No. CU0000043

Based on the stipulation of the parties, the hearing is continued to August 5, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6; this date will be for a status only. Pursuant to Ca. Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5(a), the Court orders Respondent to file with the Court a copy of the record of proceedings of the administrative hearing no later than August 5, 2022.  Respondent is to deliver a copy of said record to Petitioner by the same date.

The parties shall meet and confer regarding an acceptable briefing schedule and hearing date and advise the Court of the same prior to the status hearing on August 5, 2022.  All briefing must be submitted at least three (3) weeks prior to the scheduled hearing date.  The Court specifically requests the parties provide briefing as to the Court’s applicable standard of review for the issues raised in the writ. 


Hartfield v. Tintle                                                Case No. CU0000067

Defendant’s (“Tintle”) Anti-SLAPP motion to strike Plaintiff’s (“Hartfield”) entire complaint is granted as prayed.  Plaintiff’s entire complaint is hereby stricken without leave to amend.  (Mobile Med Servs. for Physicians & Advanced Practice Nurses, Inc. v. Rajaram (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 164.)  Defendant’s motion to deem Plaintiff a vexatious litigant is further granted as prayed.  No appearances are required.

            Defendant’s Anti-SLAPP Motion:

As a threshold matter, Plaintiff claims in his opposition that the public interest exception is applicable to the present case.  The Court is not persuaded.  To briefly restate the doctrine, Anti-SLAPP protections are not available for cases involving: (1) enforcement actions brought in the name of the People of the State of California; (2) actions brought solely in the public interest or on behalf of the general public; and (3) actions involving commercial speech.  The burden of proof is on the proponent of the exemption, i.e., the party opposing the motion.  (Simpson Strong-Tie Co. v. Gore (2010) 49 Cal.4th 12, 22.)  Where one of these exceptions applies, the Court need not even get to its customary two-pronged analysis, discussed further, infra.

The public interest exception raised by Hartfield requires him to prove all of the following: (1) the cause of action is brought solely in the public interest or on behalf of the general public; (2) he does not seek relief that is “greater than or different from” the relief sought for the general public; (3) the action, if successful, would enforce an important right affecting the public interest; and (4) private enforcement is necessary and places a disproportionate financial burden on plaintiff in relation to plaintiff’s stake in the matter.  (Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 425.17.)  No such showing has been made.

Next, the Court must consider Hartfield’s contention that Tintle is precluded from bringing her Anti-SLAPP motion by virtue of her conduct being illegal.  Again, Hartfield’s argument here is without support.

In short, Hartfield’s argument flows from the California Supreme Court’s case in Flatley v. Mauro (2006) 39 Cal.4th 299.  There, the Court established that where a defendant either: (1) concedes his or her conduct is illegal as a matter of law or (2) the evidence “conclusively establishes” such, he or she is precluded as a matter of law from using the Anti-SLAPP statute.  (Id. at 321.)  Tintle certainly does not concede any such misconduct and there is no conclusive proof in the record to establish such facial illegality.

The Court must now address the core of the Anti-SLAPP analysis, to wit: the two-pronged approach involving the following questions: (1) has Tintle made a prima facie showing that the acts that are subject to the plaintiff’s claims “arise from” protected activities; and (2) based on competent and admissible evidence, has Hartfield established that his claim has at least “minimal merit”?  (Bonni v. St Joseph Health System (2021) 11 Cal.5th 995, 1009.)

To make its determinations, the court must consider the pleadings, as well as the supporting and opposing affidavits stating the facts upon which the liability or defense is based.  (Ca. Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16(b)(2).)  The Court is limited only to evidence that would otherwise be admissible at trial.  (Evans v. Unkow (1995) 38 Cal.Appp.4th 1490, 1497.)  It must also accept as true the evidence favorable to plaintiff.  (Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert Hafif (2006) 39 Cal.4th 260, 291.)

            The Two-Part Anti-SLAPP Analysis:

The Bonni Court describes the trial court’s role in the first prong as “consider[ing] the elements of the challenged claim and what actions by the defendant supply those elements and consequently form the basis for liability.”  (Bonni, supra, 11 Cal.5th at 1009.)  It goes on to state: “The defendant’s burden is to identify what acts each challenged claim rests on and to show how those acts are protected under a statutorily defined category of protected activity.”  (Id.; see Wilson v. Cable News Network, Inc. (2019) 7 Cal.5th 871, 884.)  Those acts underlying the claim for purposes of an Anti-SLAPP motion are “determined from the plaintiffs’ allegations.”  (Medical Marijuana, Inc. v. Project CBD (2020) 46 Cal.App.5th 869, 883 [court may not “insert into a pleading claims for relief based on allegations of activities plaintiffs simply have not identified”]; Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 396.)

Here, Defendant has made her threshold showing that the claim or claims in Plaintiff’s complaint are based on protected activity.  Given this threshold showing, the Court moves then to the second prong of the analysis.

As to the second prong, the Court looks to whether Hartfield’s complaint demonstrates “minimal merit” based on competent and admissible evidence.  (Bonni v. St Joseph Health System, supra, 11 Cal.5th at 1009.)  The Court cannot, upon review of the pleadings, conclude that Hartfield has made the required showing.  As Plaintiff’s own pleadings readily concede, and as evidenced by Defendant’s motion, Plaintiff has already brought and litigated similar factual claims based on the same transaction in a prior, recent lawsuit against the same Defendant.  (See Nevada County Superior Court Case No. CU21-085588.) 

The Court takes judicial notice of its own findings and records in that case and notes that Plaintiff dismissed his lawsuit during the pendency of Defendant’s Anti-SLAPP motion.  Defendant’s Anti-SLAPP motion was subsequently granted on the merits pursuant to the holding in Moore v. Liu (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 745.  That decision on the merits in the former case represents a final determination in the matter sufficient for issue preclusion to apply in this case.  (Colebrook v. CIT Bank (2021) 64 Cal.App.5th 259 [res judicata prohibits re-litigation of the same issues already decided by the same parties in an earlier lawsuit and applies even where plaintiff brought new factual and legal issues involving the same seeking to vindicate the same “primary right”].) To hold otherwise would frustrate the entire purpose of the Anti-SLAPP statutes and allow a Plaintiff to repeatedly dismiss and refile meritless claims.  (See Simmons v. Allstate Ins. Co. (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 1068.)

In addition, it is likely Hartfield’s complaint in the present case fails to successfully plead even the basic elements of an enforceable contract. Ca. Civil Code Section 1550 defines the essential elements of a contract: (1) parties capable of contracting; (2) consent; (3) a lawful object; and (4) a sufficient cause or consideration.  (See Ca. Civil Code §§ 1595-1596 [the object is the thing which it is agreed and must be lawful; § 1608 [“If any part of a single consideration for one or more objections, or of several considerations for a single object, is unlawful, the entire contract is void”].)  The contract or contracts at issue appear on their face to compel a domestic violence victim, Tintle, for whom a criminal protective order has been issued, to continue in a romantic relationship or to otherwise mandate contact with her abuser for the purposes of child custody.  Such an agreement is facially unlawful as contrary to good morals and public policy and is unenforceable.  (Yoo v. Jho (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 1249, 1255 [“party to an illegal contract cannot come into a court of law and ask to have his illegal objects carried out”]; see also Fellom v. Adams (1969) 274 Cal.App.2d 855, 863 [“when the evidence shows that the plaintiff in substance seeks to enforce an illegal contract … the court has both the power and duty to ascertain the true facts in order that it may not unwittingly lend its assistance to the consummation or encouragement of what public policy forbids”].)

Thus, for both of the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff cannot demonstrate the required minimal merit.

            Defendant’s Vexatious Litigant Motion:

Defendant’s request to deem Plaintiff a “vexatious litigant” is well taken.  As such, Defendant’s motion to deem Plaintiff a vexatious litigant is granted as prayed.

Under Ca. Code of Civil Procedure Section 391(b)(2), a “vexatious litigant” includes a person who:

“After a litigation has been finally determined against the person, “repeatedly relitigates or attempts to relitigate, in propia persona, either (i) the validity of the determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined or (ii) the cause of action, claim, controversy, or any of the issues of fact or law, determined or concluded by the final determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined.”

As discussed above, Plaintiff brought similar, if not nearly identical claims in Nevada County Superior Court Case No. CU21-085588.  Plaintiff dismissed that lawsuit voluntarily during the pendency of Defendant’s Anti-SLAPP motion, and ultimately, the Anti-SLAPP motion was granted against Plaintiff.  At this juncture, Plaintiff is attempting to re-litigate the controversy and claims against Defendant that were determined or concluded by the final determination in the previous case. 

Plaintiff, of course, dismissed that lawsuit voluntarily during the pendency of Defendant’s Anti-SLAPP motion.  Plaintiff’s dismissal, however, does not affect the merits of the vexatious litigant motion. Case law is clear that such a voluntary dismissal does not preclude application of vexatious litigant statute for failure of the matter to be “finally determined.”  (Tokerud v. Capitolbank Sacramento (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 775, 779 [holding that a voluntarily dismissed action can be counted for purposes of the vexatious litigant statute].)


Dougan v. Sierra Nevada Hospital et al               Case No. CU18-083371

The Court intends to grant Plaintiffs’ motion for trial preference pursuant to Ca. Code of Civil Procedure Section 36(a), but the stipulated date proposed in the motion is a Court holiday. Appearances are required by counsel for all parties to discuss and select a date for the commencement of trial commensurate with Section 36.


Alvarado v. Rees                                                  Case No. CU20-085131

No appearances are required.  The hearing on the motion for summary judgment is continued on the Court’s own motion to July 29, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6. 


AFT v. Smith et al                                               Case No. CU21-085699

The Court has executed the stipulation and order to file the second amended cross-complaint submitted by Cross-Complainant Felley and Cross-Defendants AFT and DFI on or about July 1, 2022.  Cross-complainant is directed to file its second-amended cross-complaint as provided for in the stipulated order.  The demurrer is hereby taken off calendar pursuant to the stipulation of the parties.


PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO wear a face covering. (See Executive Order 205).

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging such ZOOM appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and thereafter notify the clerk’s office BY EMAIL AT OA@NCCOURT.NET OR BY CALLING (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing.  If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling.  Any argument is limited to five minutes.  California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Unless the court orders otherwise, the court does not provide court reporters for civil law and motion hearings and case management conferences at the court's expense.  Any litigant who wants a record of a law and motion matter or a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense.  Local Rule 10.00.3B.                           


Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

July 8, 2022 :

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

THE COURT HAS CREATED A NEW EMAIL ADDRESS FOR REQUESTING ORAL ARGUMENT.  PLEASE SEE BELOW.

Harper v. Grogan                                                Case No. CU20-084703

No appearances are required.  Plaintiff’s motion is continued on the Court’s own motion to July 22, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. in Department ‘A’ of the Truckee Courthouse.  Plaintiff’s other discovery/sanction motion, presently scheduled for July 22, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 of the Nevada City Courthouse, will be transferred to the Truckee Courthouse as well and heard concurrently in Department ‘A’ at the same time.

Provided the ordinary procedures for arranging remote appearances are followed, Counsel is authorized to appear remotely at the hearings on July 22, 2022.


PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, must wear a face covering. (See Executive Order 192).

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging such ZOOM appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and thereafter notify the clerk’s office BY EMAIL AT OA@NCCOURT.NET OR BY CALLING (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing.  If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling.  Any argument is limited to five minutes.  California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Unless the court orders otherwise, the court does not provide court reporters for civil law and motion hearings and case management conferences at the court's expense.  Any litigant who wants a record of a law and motion matter or a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense.  Local Rule 10.00.3B.


 

Probate & Conservatorship Tentative Rulings

August 5, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

 

1.      CU0000043    In Re Wright, Laurel

Appearances are required by the parties or their respective counsel. This is a status hearing only. The Court requires an update on the case, including the parties’ proposed briefing schedule and date for a contested hearing.


2.      P06-14321      In the Matter of CHAD D. HANSON

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect. The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for August 2, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


3.      P10-15114      In the Matter of ROBERT SNELL

The hearing on the petition is continued on the Court’s own motion to September 2, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court is in receipt of the Court Investigator’s report for the current review period indicating that the Conservatee wishes to seek the termination of the conservatorship.

Pursuant to Ca. Probate Code § 1852, counsel for the Conservatee is hereby appointed.  The Clerk is directed forthwith to notice newly-appointed Conservatee’s counsel of the appointment, continued hearing date, and to provide counsel with any necessary documents from the Court’s file.  The continued hearing date will be for both confirmation of counsel and status. No appearances are required.

The Court notes that the current conservator was appointed on August 6, 2021, and that an accounting is due by August 6, 2022.  (Ca. Probate Code § 2620(a).)


4.      P15-15709      In the Matter of ARIANA TOOR

This case was improperly calendared for hearing in Department 6.  The case is continued on the Court’s own motion to August 11, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 3.


5.      P17-16148      In the Matter of LEROY HUDSON

The petition is granted as prayed.  The previously scheduled biennial review hearing set for June 21, 2024, is hereby vacated in light of the Conservatee’s death as reported by the Court Investigator in his June 13, 2022, filing.   No appearances are required.


6.      P20-16683      In the Matter of BRETT SULLIVAN (Estate of Karen Sullivan)

The petition is approved as prayed.  Counsel is directed to provide a conforming order to the Court within one week.  No appearances are required.


7.      P20-16710      In the Matter of MARIA VAUGHN

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect. The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for August 2, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Conservatee’s estate is ordered to pay the Court Investigator’s report fee of $475.00 forthwith.   The current conservator was appointed on August 31, 2021, and an accounting is due by August 31, 2022.  (Ca. Probate Code § 2620(a).)  No appearances are required.


8.      P21-16908      In the Matter of HARRY SCOTT STILES

The petition is granted as prayed.  All other hearing dates remain as previously set.   No appearances are required.


9.      P21-16952      In the Matter of HENRY GURU

Appearance is required by Petitioner/Guardian to show proof that the funds have been deposited into a federally insured, blocked account.  The Court’s file still does not contain any such confirmation at this time.


10.  P21-16971      In the Matter of David Freeman

Appearance by counsel for the Petitioner is required.  Petitioner indicates in her pleadings that no creditor’s claims have been received in this matter and that all times for the same have lapsed.  The Court’s file reflects a creditor’s claim was filed on July 15, 2022, in the amount of $1,300,000.00. 

The Court requires a status update as to the creditor’s claim and intends to order Petitioner to provide, within thirty (30) days, an accounting and report of administration pursuant to Ca. Probate Code §§ 10900 and 10950.  Petitioner is also ordered to notice the creditor of the continued hearing date.


11.  P22-17011      In the Matter of WILLIAM H. LAWS TRUST

The hearing is continued on the Court’s own motion to August 26, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Petitioners filed a second-amended motion to compel responses to their subpoena duces tecum and noticed the hearing for the same date. 

Petitioner and Deponent are advised to review the Court’s prior tentative issued on July 22, 2022, and to ensure all documents were filed as previously ordered.  No appearances are required.


12.  P22-17036      In the Matter of ROBERT M. GRINNELL

The hearing on the petition is continued on the Court’s own motion to September 9, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The temporary conservatorship remains in effect as previously ordered until the continued hearing date.  No appearances are required for this hearing but both Conservator and proposed Conservatee will be required to attend at the continued hearing date.

Petitioner filed an amended petition for appointment of conservator on June 6, 2022, and is no longer requesting medical decision-making authority.  The Court, however, notes a number of other defects in the pleadings that need to be addressed before it can move forward on the petition.  There is presently no notice of hearing in file, only the corresponding proof of service.  Petitioner is ordered to notice Conservatee of the new hearing date and to file the corresponding notice and proof of service.  Conservator is further required to serve a proof of citation on the Conservatee at least fifteen (15) days before the continued hearing date.  (Ca. Probate Code § 1824.)

Petitioner is directed to seek assistance from the Court’s Self-Help Center as necessary to assist her in correcting the above-described issues.  Information on contacting the Self-Help Center can be found on the Court’s website at: https://www.nevada.courts.ca.gov/self-help/self-help-center or by phone at: (530)362-5328.


13.  P69-07222      In the Matter of ALLISON F. OSWALD

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect. The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for August 2, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


14.  PR0000022     In Re Roden, Geirge Edward

The petition to administer decedent’s estate is continued on the Court’s own motion to September 23, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Defects remain in the Petitioner’s pleadings and the Court notes no new documents were filed since the previous hearing date on June 24, 2022.

Petitioner’s notice is on the incorrect form; Petitioner must refile notice on Judicial Council form DE-121.  Petitioner must send this notice to all required parties and timely file proof of service.  Petitioner must also file proof of publication and declinations for each of the named co-executors who are declining to act.  Finally, since decedent’s will is handwritten, Petitioner is required to file a typed copy of the will with her pleadings.  (Ca. Probate Code § 8002(b)(1).)

Petitioner is directed to seek assistance from the Court’s Self-Help Center as necessary to assist her in correcting the above-described issues.  Information on contacting the Self-Help Center can be found on the Court’s website at: https://www.nevada.courts.ca.gov/self-help/self-help-center or by phone at: (530)362-5328.  No appearances are required.


15.  PR0000045     In Re Kinney, Nora Ellen

The petition to administer decedent’s estate is granted as prayed.  The Court’s file has a proposed order for probate but appears to be missing corresponding letters.  Petitioner must submit conforming letters to the Court within one week.  No appearances are required.


16.  PR0000046     In Re Ganz, Linda Kahn

The petition is continued on the Court’s own motion to September 2, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court’s file is missing both proof of publication as well as the required DE-147 duties form.  Petitioner is also directed to re-notice and file a proof of service for the continued hearing date.  Petitioner’s amended notice filed with the Court on June 28, 2022, is missing a corresponding proof of service. 

Counsel for Petitioner is directed to file the required documents before the next hearing.   No appearances are required.


17.  PR0000057     In Re Crouse, Kathleen (Von Seebach Living Trust)

Appearance by counsel for Petitioner is required to address the issues noted below.  The parties have resolved this matter by agreement and submitted a stipulation and proposed order in connection with this matter.  The Court has no objection as to the stipulation and proposed order but Petitioner will need to address the issue of bond before it can be executed.

Specifically, the stipulation and proposed order contemplate the removal of both co-trustees and the appointment of a private professional fiduciary to administer the trust.  Since the proposed successor trustee is not a person listed in the trust instrument, the Court is required to impose bond to secure performance of the trustee’s duties absent “compelling circumstances.”  (Ca. Probate Code § 15602.)  There are no waivers of bond presently on file.  Absent such waivers, the Court intends to impose bond.  Petitioner’s counsel may submit such waivers for all beneficiaries at or before the hearing.


18.  PR0000059     In Re: Hoover Trust - Bypass Trust

The hearing on the petition to terminate the sub-trust is continued on the Court’s own motion to September 9, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  No appearances are required.

Petitioner pleads that there are five contingent remainder beneficiaries entitled to notice of the present petition and that she has noticed the same.  The Court agrees that those individuals are entitled to notice under Ca. Probate Code § 16060 and the interpreting case law, but Petitioner’s notice and proof of service filed with the Court on June 30, 2022, do not indicate those beneficiaries were properly noticed and served.  (See Salter v. Lerner (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1189 [affirming contingent remainder beneficiaries’ rights to trust information under Section 16060].)

Petitioner is directed to file an updated notice and proof of service for the identified contingent remainder beneficiaries.  No other procedural defects are noted.

_____________________________________________________________________________

These are the Court’s tentative rulings.  Attorneys and parties are directed to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing, and notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@NCCOURT.NET or by calling (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 8.27.

Parties are directed to review Nevada County Superior Court local rules 8.13 and 8.14 regarding proposed orders in probate matters.  Orders should be drafted and submitted in conformance with such rules.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the courthouse ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO wear a face covering (see Executive Order 205).

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging a remote appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

Probate & Conservatorship Tentative Rulings

July 29, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

 

1.      P03-13732      In the Matter of PAUL S. JOHNSON

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect. The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


2.      P09-14833      In the Matter of JACQUELINE C. WALKER

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect. The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


3.      P09-14943      In the Matter of SEAN KRULISKY

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect. The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


4.      P11-15177      In the Matter of PHILLIP T. KRULISKY

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect. The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


5.      P12-15334      In the Matter of HELEN POWELL

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


6.      P12-15413      In the Matter of MATTHEW UNRUH

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


7.      P14-15643      In the Matter of CHRISTOPHER JOSHUA HOWIE

Appearance of the Conservator on the order to show cause is required.  The matter last came before the Court on an accounting in May 2018.  Conservator has not filed any subsequent accountings.


8.      P14-15697      In the Matter of JUSTIN RAE KOHNKE

Appearances by counsel for the parties are required.  The Court is in need of a status update from the previous mediation and whether the Conservatee still continues to object to the continuation of the conservatorship.  If the Conservatee is still seeking termination of the conservatorship, Conservatee’s counsel is directed to file a petition for termination in accordance with Ca. Probate Code § 1852.


9.      P15-15861      In the Matter of SHANE KRULISKY

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


10.  P21-16894      In the Matter of BARBARA FRIDAY (Marie Meshew Trust)

The petition is denied without prejudice.  Petitioner seeks relief under Ca. Probate Code § 248 to determine the identity of heirs and determine distribution of trust assets.  Section 248 mandates that a party seeking relief under that section file verified pleadings:  “any person interested in the property … may file a verified petition in the superior court of the county in which the property or any part thereof is situated ….”  Petitioner’s pleadings are unverified and the petition is denied without prejudice for that reason.  No appearances are required.


11.  P21-16970      In the Matter of DEBORAH A PUTNAM (Estate of Timothy Ketron)

The petition is approved as prayed.  The Court notes that its file is missing a conforming order.  Counsel is referred to Nevada County Superior Court local rules 8.13 and 8.14.  Counsel is ordered to submit a conforming order within one week of the hearing.  No appearances are required.


12.  P22-17044      In Re Lavagnino, Briana (Kent D. Davis Living Trust)

Appearances are required by all parties or their respective counsels.  The Court last heard this matter on June 24, 2022, and ordered that an accounting be filed no later than July 22, 2022.  The Court then set a hearing on the petition for August 19, 2022.  At present, the Court’s file does not contain the required accounting.  The Court requires the Parties to provide a status update on its preparation, service on other parties, and filing with the Court.


13.  P77-08588      In the Matter of MELODY ANN MATHEWS

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


14.  PR0000015     In Re Subbotin, Laurie (The Orellana Family Trust)

The Court is in receipt of Petitioner’s status report filed on July 20, 2022, indicating this matter may be mooted or resolved by developments in the case.  Petitioner requests this hearing be continued one month and indicates that the petition is likely to either be dismissed or the case resolved.  The hearing is hereby continued to September 2, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  No appearances are required.


15.  PR0000047     In Re Frost, Lori (Wallace Wayne Stanley Trust)

Appearance is required by counsel for the Petitioner.  This matter was last heard on July 22, 2022, where trust beneficiary Dean Karadunis appeared and expressed an objection to Petitioner’s appointment as successor trustee.  The Court notes Mr. Karadunis was properly noticed of the initial hearing and did not file any objections or other pleadings in the matter.  Nonetheless, the Court continued the matter one week and directed Mr. Karadunis to file any objections with the Court in writing no later than July 26, 2022.  The Court’s file does not reflect any such objections were filed.

Petitioner’s petition to be appointed as successor trustee is granted.  Based on the prior representations of counsel, the Court intends to set bond at $100,000.00 subject to a review hearing in approximately sixty (60) days to allow Petitioner an opportunity to marshal and determine trust assets.  Bond can thereafter be adjusted as required once assets are fully determined.


16.  PR0000051     In Re Lyman, Madalynn

The petition for limited conservatorship is continued on the Court’s own motion to September 2, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes its file is presently missing the following required items: (1) reports from Alta Regional and the Court Investigator; and (2) a capacity declaration.  Further, since this is a limited conservatorship matter, appointment of counsel is mandated for the Conservatee.  (Ca. Probate Code § 1471.)  Counsel for the proposed Conservatee is hereby appointed.  The Clerk is directed forthwith to notice newly-appointed Conservatee’s counsel of the appointment, continued hearing date, and to provide counsel with any necessary documents from the Court’s file.  No appearances are required.


17.  PR0000052     In Re Van Skike, Thomas Charles

The petition to administer decedent’s estate is continued on the Court’s own motion to September 9, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that its file is missing a proof of publication.  No other procedural defects are noted.


18.  PR0000056     In Re: CAMPEMENT D'OURS WEST

Appearance by counsel for the Petitioner is required.  Petitioner seeks to be appointed as a corporate director pursuant to Ca. Corporations Code § 5520(e) and alleges in support thereof that the sole corporate director died in May 2021.  The Court takes judicial notice of the April 19, 2022, statement of information referenced in Petitioner’s pleadings and filed with the California Secretary of State indicating that Julie Tannehill is the current CEO, Secretary, and CFO of the Corporation.  The Court further notes that the articles of incorporation attached to the petition indicate numerous memberships were issued.  Section 5520(e) specifically restricts the Court’s ability to grant relief to situations where, as is relevant here, “a corporation has not issued memberships and … all the directors resign, die, or become incompetent ….”

Petitioner is required to explain why the Court has authority to grant the requested relief where the Corporation has both issued memberships and there appears to an acting corporate director. 

Petitioner also requests that the Court specifically authorize him to manage and dispose of the Corporation’s property.  Counsel is also required to explain the Court’s legal authority for such relief as Section 5520 does not explicitly authorize the same. 

Finally, Petitioner should address why service on the Corporation’s agent for service of process is not required for the present petition.


19.  PR0000070     In Re Tyler M.

Appearance is required by Petitioners on the petition to appoint a temporary guardian.  The Court proposes to briefly continue the hearing on the temporary conservatorship to allow Petitioners to cure the pleading defects noted below, but would like Petitioners to address the Court as to whether there are any issues that might arise by such a continuance.

The Court notes there is no proof of notice/service on either the proposed ward or the parents.  No explanation is provided as to why the mother and proposed ward were not noticed of the hearing. As to the proposed ward’s father, Petitioners seek a waiver of notice under Ca. Probate Code § 2250(e) but have not made the requisite showing of “good cause” as defined under Ca. Rules of Court, Rule 7.1012.  Petitioners further indicate they’ve been unable locate the proposed ward’s father and outline their various efforts to do so.  Petitioners have not made the requisite showing of due diligence as required to waive notice where an individual’s whereabouts are unknown. Petitioners are directed to review Ca. Rules of Court, Rule 7.52.  Petitioners must address these notice and service defects before the Court can proceed on the petition for temporary guardianship.

Upon review of the petition and other documents, it appears to the Court that the proposed ward may be a person described by Ca. Welfare & Institutions Code § 300.  Pursuant to its authority under Ca. Probate Code § 1513(b), the Court hereby refers this matter to Nevada County Child Welfare Services (“CWS”).  CWS is ordered to initiate an investigation pursuant to Ca. Welfare & Institutions Code 329 and to proceed as mandated under that statute, which includes providing this Court with a written copy of the findings and conclusions of its investigation.  The Clerk is forthwith directed to submit a written referral to CPS and to include a copy of the petition for guardianship, court investigator’s report, if any, and any other material information.

Finally, the Court notes that this is a petition for the appointment of a relative as guardian.  As such, the Court requires a court investigator’s report.  (Ca. Probate Code § 1513(a).)  Quest Investigations is hereby appointed and directed to prepare and submit a report to the Court.  The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of the petition to the court investigator forthwith.

_____________________________________________________________________________

These are the Court’s tentative rulings.  Attorneys and parties are directed to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing, and notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@NCCOURT.NET or by calling (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 8.27.

Parties are directed to review Nevada County Superior Court local rules 8.13 and 8.14 regarding proposed orders in probate matters.  Orders should be drafted and submitted in conformance with such rules.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the courthouse ARE CURRENTLY REQUIRED TO wear a face covering (see Executive Order 205).

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging such ZOOM appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

_____________________________________________________________________________

Probate & Conservatorship Tentative Rulings

July 22, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

 

1.      P01-13308      In the Matter of BRADFORD A GILL (Estate of Wilford Gil)

The petition is continued on the Court’s own motion to August 19, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that there is no proof of notice, service, or, alternatively, waivers of the same in its file.  Counsel for Petitioner is directed to file the required documents before the next hearing.  No other procedural defects are noted.  No appearances are required.


2.      P17-16159      In the Matter of JOHN THOMAS-FLETCHER PAUL

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the court investigator for this review period.  The Court notes that the Conservatee objects to the continuation of the conservatorship and that the biennial report indicates a limited conservatorship may be more appropriate. 

Counsel for the Conservatee is appointed to investigate the above-described issues.  The biennial review hearing is continued to August 12, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6, for confirmation of counsel and continued hearing on the biennial review.  The Clerk is directed forthwith to notice newly-appointed Conservatee’s counsel of the appointment and continued hearing date and to provide counsel with the recently filed court-investigator’s report.  No appearances are required.


3.      P19-16519      In the Matter of TIMOTHY MILES OBRIEN

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the court investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 19, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


4.      P19-16567      In the Matter of LACEY J FRANK

Appearances are required by counsel for the Conservator and Conservatee.  The Court is in receipt of the Alta Regional Report filed July 15, 2022, but notes it does not have a report from court-appointed counsel for the Conservatee.  The Court requests a status update from the parties and intends to set Conservator’s motion for a contested hearing if Conservator still wants to proceed in light of the Alta Report.


5.      P21-16795      In the Matter of KLAUS MATHES

The hearing is continued on the Court’s own motion to August 26, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that the Public Guardian filed a declaration on July 19, 2022, indicating that the issues previously identified by the Court have been corrected and are pending review by the probate referee.  Public Guardian is to file an amended inventory and appraisal with the Court before the continued hearing date.  No appearances are required.


6.      P21-16899      Estate of DENNIS SPINA

The petition is approved as prayed.  The Court notes that its file is missing a conforming order.  Counsel is referred to Nevada County Superior Court local rules 8.13 and 8.14.  Counsel is ordered to submit a conforming order within one week of the hearing.  No appearances are required.


7.      P21-16945      In the Matter of KARLA KNAUSS (Estate of John B. Stewart)

The petition is granted as prayed.  No appearances are required.


8.      PR0000014     In Re Bega, Joan

Appearances by counsel are required.  The Court requires an update on the petition for appointment of a permanent conservator.  The Court notes temporary letters and orders issued on July 1, 2022, and further notes there are no objections on file as to appointment of the permanent conservator.


9.      PR0000016     In Re Dinges-Reed, Cindy (Alberta D. Oates Revocable Trust)

Appearance by counsel for Petitioner is required.  The Court requires a status update as to whether Petitioner has had any contact with Respondent and whether Petitioner is aware of any objections to the petition.  If there are no objections filed and no appearance by Respondent, the Court intends to the grant the petition as prayed.


10.  PR0000047     In Re Frost, Lori (Wallace Wayne Stanley Trust)

Appearance by counsel for the petitioner is required.  The Court notes the May 15, 1996, order appointing Edward Karadunis successor trustee that was submitted with Petitioner’s declaration does not contain a page bearing the judge’s signature.  The Court needs to verify that the prior order was properly executed before ruling on this petition.  If Petitioner is in possession of such, she is directed to provide a copy to the Court.

In addition, Petitioner seeks appointment as successor trustee without bond.  Petitioner is, however, not a person listed in the trust instrument as a trustee or successor trustee.  Pursuant to Ca. Probate Code § 15602(b), the Court must make a finding of “compelling circumstances” to appoint such a person without bond.  The Court notes no waivers of bond by the adult beneficiaries were included with the moving papers.

_____________________________________________________________________________

These are the Court’s tentative rulings.  Attorneys and parties are directed to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing, and notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@NCCOURT.NET or by calling (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 8.27.

Parties are directed to review Nevada County Superior Court local rules 8.13 and 8.14 regarding proposed orders in probate matters.  Orders should be drafted and submitted in conformance with such rules.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the courthouse ARE CURRENTLY REQUIRED TO wear a face covering (see Executive Order 205).

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging such ZOOM appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

_____________________________________________________________________________

Probate & Conservatorship Tentative Rulings

July 15, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

 

1.      P17-16166      In the Matter of HYON ENGELMAN

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The court investigation fee is waived.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 12, 2024, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.


2.      P18-16351      In the Matter of ELIZABETH M. BROWN

This hearing date was previously vacated by the Court on January 29, 2021, and is on the Court’s calendar in error.  This matter is taken off calendar and there are no future court dates.


3.      P21-16862      In the Matter of JOHN MCKEE (Estate of Barbara Hammond)

The petition is granted as prayed.  No appearances are required.


4.      P21-16908      In the Matter of HARRY SCOTT STILES

Appearances by counsel for all parties are required.  The Court requires a status update on the case generally, and more specifically as to: (1) whether the Public Guardian intends to pursue a permanent conservatorship or if they are still seeking to withdraw their petition; and (2) the status of the previously discussed neurological evaluation by UCSF doctors.


5.      P21-16952      In the Matter of HENRY GURU

Appearance is required by Petitioner/Guardian to show proof that the funds have been deposited into a federally insured, blocked account.  The Court’s file still does not contain any such confirmation at this time.


6.      P97-12637      In the Matter of MELINDA I. WILSON

Appearance is required by Conservator.  As to the biennial review, the Court is in receipt of the Court Investigator’s report dated July 7, 2022.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect. 

As to the thirteenth accounting and report filed by Conservator, the Court notes that Conservator has not provided an updated accounting.  The Court also notes that Conservator requests fees in connection with her accounting but that she has not provided a detailed declaration supporting her request for such fees.  As for requested fees, Conservator has waived the same at this time due to the lack of sufficient funds for payment of the same.  To the extent Conservator wishes to seek such fees in the future, she must provide a detailed breakdown of all services rendered for the relevant time-frame at issue.  The Court also notes that a waiver of future accountings may be appropriate under Ca. Probate Code § 2628.  The Court wishes to have Conservator address all of these issues at the hearing.


7.      P98-12702      In the Matter of ERIC CARLSON

This case was previously continued to August 12, 2022, upon written motion of the Conservator.  The July 15, 2022, hearing date has already been vacated.  No appearances are required.


8.      PR0000024     In Re Kelly, Sharon E

Appearance is required by Petitioner’s counsel.  The Court notes that the successor trustee petition seeks to waive both an accounting and imposition of bond.  The Court notes that while the Trust instrument does not require bond, the proposed successor trustee is not listed in the trust instrument.  Pursuant to Ca. Probate Code § 15602(b), Petitioner must demonstrate “compelling circumstances” to waive bond under such instances.  No waivers of bond by the beneficiaries are included with the petition and no such compelling circumstances have been demonstrated.

Further, since no accounting was provided with the petition and there are no other pleadings addressing it, the Court is unable to ascertain the current value of the trust so as to determine the proper amount of bond.  If the beneficiaries are unwilling to waive an accounting and/or bond, the Court may require the Trustee to provide an accounting and will set bond accordingly.


9.      P22-17000      In the Matter of ROBIN BOWERS (ADD-ON CASE)

The petition is approved as prayed.  The Court notes that its file is missing a conforming order.  Counsel is referred to Nevada County Superior Court local rules 8.13 and 8.14.  Counsel is ordered to submit a conforming order within one week of the hearing.  No appearances are required.

_____________________________________________________________________________

These are the Court’s tentative rulings.  Attorneys and parties are directed to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing, and notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@NCCOURT.NET or by calling (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 8.27.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the courthouse ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED to wear a face covering (see Executive Order 205).

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging such ZOOM appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

_____________________________________________________________________________

Probate & Conservatorship Tentative Rulings

July 8, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

If a tentative ruling is not issued below for a matter which you believe should be on calendar, please contact OA@nccourt.net.

1.  P15-15783             In re Marie Vacchiano

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The court investigation fee is waived.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 5, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.

2.  P19-16555             In re Steven Steger

The Court notes that an inventory and appraisal was not timely filed in this matter and that there is no first accounting currently on file. Appearances are required by counsel regarding required submission of the same and to see if future accountings should be waived pursuant to Ca. Probate Code Section 2628.  Counsel for Conservator submitted a “Report Regarding Finances” document on or about May 31, 2022, indicating that there is no money in the Conservatee’s estate and that his Social Security income is handled directly by his representative payee.

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The court investigation fee is waived.

3.  P20-16685             In re Helen Jash

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  Conservatee’s estate to pay the Court Investigator’s report fee of $475.00 forthwith.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 5, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.

The Court notes there is an inventory and appraisal in its file but that no first accounting has yet been filed.  Appearance from Conservator is required to provide the Court with a status update as to the first accounting in this matter.

4.  P20-16713             In Re Arlette Schwendener-Bartlome

Appearances are required by the parties, including the Nevada County Public Administrator.  Unless good cause is shown, the Court intends to grant Petitioner’s request to be relieved and to appoint the Nevada County Public Administrator to serve as successor administrator.

5.  P21-16893             Choate Trust

The Court notes that special trustee Kristin Miguel was not noticed of the hearing or served with the petition.  No other procedural defects are noted.  On the Court’s own motion, the petition is continued to August 12, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to allow petitioner to properly notice the special trustee.  No appearances are required.

6.  P21-16921             In re Kristy Miller

The petition is approved as prayed.  No appearances are required. 

7.  P21-16965             In re Preston Muendel

The petition is approved as prayed.  No appearances are required.  

8.  P22-17004             Toner Trust (In the matter of CYNTHIA A SULLIVAN)

Appearances are required by all parties.  The Court would inquire if the parties are amenable to attending mediation to resolve their disputes.  If the parties are not amenable, the Court intends to set the matter for trial on the issues raised in each side’s respective petitions. 

In addition, the Court orders, pursuant to its authority under Ca. Probate Code Section 15602(a)(2), that Trustee Sullivan post bond in the amount of $2,166,192.56 and provide proof to the Court.  If Trustee Sullivan fails to post bond within a reasonable time, the Court will temporarily suspend her as trustee and appoint a private professional fiduciary agreeable to the parties to act as temporary special trustee pending the outcome of any mediation or contested hearings on the presently filed motions.

9.  P97-12518             In re Jennifer Zankich

The Court is in receipt of the biennial report from the Court Investigator for this review period.  The conservatorship is continued in its present form and all prior orders remain in effect.  The court investigation fee is waived.  The Court sets a biennial status review hearing for July 5, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.  The court investigation fee is waived.  No appearances are required.

10.  P98-12703           In the Matter of Eric Carlson

The motion for continuance is granted.  The review hearing presently set for July 15, 2022, is hereby continued to August 12, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.  Petitioner is directed to timely file the required accounting before that date.  No appearances are required. 

11.  PR0000002          In re Paul Hicks

Appearance is required by Successor Trustee Hicks.  The Court requires a status update as to the accounting from former Trustee Dial as well as any requests for attorney’s fees and/or surcharge.  The Court notes it is not in receipt of any new filings since the last hearing on May 27, 2022.

12. PR0000036           In re Verena Shayani

No appearances are required.  The petition for termination of trust due to changed circumstances is granted as prayed.

_____________________________________________________________________________

These are the Court’s tentative rulings.  Attorneys and parties are directed to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing, and notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@NCCOURT.NET or by calling (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 8.27.

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the courthouse must wear a face covering (see Executive Order 192).

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging such ZOOM appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

_____________________________________________________________________________

Case Management Conferences

August 8, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

 

1.      CU0000045          Guyton, Jeffrey P. vs. Cruz, Devon German et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 17, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from the Defendant.  No appearances are required. 


2.      CU0000060          Rentschler, Kristen vs. Core Chiropractic et al

The case-management conference is continued to September 26, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that all named Defendants have answered the complaint and the case appears to be at issue but there are no case-management conference statements on file from any of the parties.  Counsels for both Plaintiff and Defendants are ordered to timely file case-management conference statements prior to the continued hearing date.  No appearances are required.


3.      CU20-084636       LLOYD'S LONDON vs. TAMMY ANAGNOS et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 17, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The case is not yet at issue.  Plaintiff received an order to serve Defendant Craig Nochajski by publication on July 27, 2022.  The parties are ordered to file updated case-management conference statements for the continued hearing date.  No appearances are required. 


4.      CU20-084721       STEPHEN VALENTINO vs. VALLEY et al

No appearances are required.  The Court’s file appears to indicate that jury fees have not been posted in this matter.  If Counsel believes such fees have been posted, they need to notify the Court.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 7-day court trial.

Trial Date: June 6, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: May 26, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: May 15, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


5.      CU20-084785       RYAN RAY SAY vs. CLAUDE MURRY CONLEY

No appearances are required.  Counsel represented at the hearing on July 18, 2022, that jury fees would be posted but none have been received.  If Counsel believes such fees have been posted, they need to notify the Court.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 7-day court trial.

Trial Date: July 11, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: June 30, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: June 19, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


6.      CU21-085450       MICHAEL MARTIN et al vs. BRIAN BROGIE et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 17, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Plaintiffs received an order to serve Defendants by publication on June 1, 2022, but there is no proof of service, default, or appearance from either Defendant.  Plaintiff’s counsel will need to appear at the continued hearing date to give the Court a status update on its service efforts.  No appearances are required. 


7.      CU21-085797       KOSLIN vs. GV DEVELOPMENT LLC

The case-management conference is continued to October 31, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  A demurrer and motion for leave to file a second-amended complaint are currently pending hearing and the case is not yet at issue.  No appearances are required. 


8.      CU21-085851       STATE FARM vs. CORRIE DANIELS et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Both Defendants have filed answers to the first-amended complaint and the case is at issue.  Plaintiff filed a case-management conference statement on July 25, 2022, indicating it would be moving for discharge when appropriate.  Defendants have not filed updated case-management conference statements for this hearing and are ordered to timely file an updated statement no later than September 26, 2022.  The Court intends to set trial at the continued hearing date. No appearances are required.


9.      CU21-086078       KATIE BRUNTLAND vs. DIGNITY HEALTH et al

This case is on for both a continued case-management conference and an order to show cause in re: contempt for Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure to appear at the case-management conference on July 11, 2022.  Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to appear on the order to show cause and to provide the Court with a status update as to her efforts to serve Defendant Kimberlee Naisbitt.


10.  CU22-086165       CHRISTINE YOUNG vs. TAMARA TENORIO

This case is on for both a continued case-management conference and an order to show cause in re: contempt for Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure to appear at the case-management conference on July 11, 2022.  Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to appear on the order to show cause and to provide the Court with a status update as to her efforts to serve Defendant Tamara Tenorio.


11.  CU22-086264       FRIENDS OF MURCHIE vs. MCCLAIN et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 24, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Plaintiffs’ second-amended complaint was filed on June 24, 2022, and there is a demurrer pending hearing on August 26, 2022.  No appearances are required. 


12.  CU22-086265       COHEN et al vs. WCS PROPERTIES, LLC et al

Appearance is required by Plaintiffs’ counsel.  The case was originally filed on February 18, 2022.  Default has been entered against Defendant WCS Properties but Defendant Mullins has not been served or otherwise appeared in this matter.  The Court requires a status update on Plaintiffs’ efforts to serve Mullins.


13.  CU22-086271       MERCEDES BENZ vs. ENERGY BASED SOLUTIONS et al

Appearance is required by Plaintiff’s counsel.  The case was originally filed on February 22, 2022.  Plaintiff indicates it has been unable to serve either Defendant but that attempts to do so will continue.  The Court requires a status update on Plaintiff’s efforts to serve both Defendants.


14.  CU22-086284       EMPLOYERS PREFERRED vs. UBX INC.

Appearance is required by Plaintiff’s counsel.  The case was originally filed on February 14, 2022.  The sole Defendant has not been served or otherwise appeared in this action and Plaintiff has not filed an updated case-management conference statement.  The Court requires a status update on Plaintiff’s efforts to serve the Defendant.

---------------

These are the Court’s tentative rulings.  Attorneys and parties are urged to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 4.00.8B.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the Nevada City and Truckee courthouses are strongly encouraged to wear a face covering in all public areas of the courthouse and in shared workspaces. (See Executive Order 205, posted on the Court’s website). 

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  YOU MAY APPEAR VIA VIDEO BY ARRANGING A REMOTE APPEARANCE AT LEAST TWO COURT DAYS PRIOR TO HEARING BY EMAILING: NCCOUNTER@NCCOURT.NET.


Case Management Conferences

August 1, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

 

1.      CL21-085231             CLEANRITE INC vs. JAMI MICHELLE CORTES

Appearances are required by counsel for both parties.  The minutes from the previous hearing on June 6, 2022, note that the parties had reached a settlement agreement.  The Court does not have either a settlement agreement or request for dismissal.  Counsel is to provide an update on the current case status.


2.      CU0000023                Britton, Tiffany v. Mountain Valley

No appearances are required.  No jury fees have been posted in this matter.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 12-day court trial.

Trial Date: August 1, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: July 21, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: July 10, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


3.      CU0000036                Garten, Morgan v. Isenhower, Khaos et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from either Defendant in this matter.  No appearances are required. 


4.      CU19-083946             BERNADETTE FISCHER vs. DINA PINEDA et al

No appearances are required.  The case is at issue and a jury trial is set as follows:

Length: 6-day jury trial.

Trial Date: May 23, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: May 12, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: May 1, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


5.      CU19-084105             ANNE ROSEN vs. THE HOLBROOKE HOTEL LLC

No appearances are required.  The Court’s file appears to indicate that jury fees have not been posted in this matter.  If Counsel believes such fees have been posted, they need to notify the Court.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 4-day court trial.

Trial Date: June 13, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: June 2, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: May 22, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


6.      CU21-085429             DAVID SHAFER vs. MONSANTO COMPANY et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 17, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  On May 20, 2022, the Court signed an order pursuant to the parties’ stipulation to stay the matter for one hundred twenty (120) days.  In the event the matter has not settled and no request for dismissal is filed within the period of the stay, the Parties are directed, pursuant to the Court’s prior order, to file a joint status report prior to the next court date.   No appearances are required. 


7.      CU21-085860             GEORGE DEVER et al vs. DANIEL J. CROUCH et al

The case-management conference is continued to September 12, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that both Defendants have been served.  Defendant Daniel Crouch has been defaulted but Defendant Kristi Crouch has not either appeared or been defaulted.  The case is not at issue.  The Court’s does not have a case-management statement on file from Plaintiff. Counsel for Plaintiff is ordered to timely file a case-management-conference statement prior to the continued hearing date.  No appearances are required.


8.      CU21-085883             JOHN VOLZ vs. DORSEY MEADOWS HOA

Appearances are required by counsel for all parties.  The Court previously continued the case-management conference in July to the present date because Cross-Defendant Extreme Roofing had not filed an answer to Dorsey Meadows’ Cross-Complaint.  The Court still does not have an answer from or default of Extreme Roofing.  The Court requires a status update as to the case and any potential settlement negotiations.  The case is not at issue.


9.      CU22-086260             SALVATORE V. ALBERTI vs. NANCY ALBERTI

The sole Defendant has been defaulted and the Court entered judgment on July 22, 2022.  This case is dropped from the Court’s calendar. 


10.  CU22-086262             KYLIE HART vs. CHESTER JAHNS

Appearance is required by Plaintiff’s counsel.  The case was originally filed on February 16, 2022, and the sole Defendant has not yet been served.  The Court requires a status update on Plaintiff’s efforts to serve the Defendant.


11.  CU22-086283             MICHAEL STRONG et al vs. MM REFORESTATION

Plaintiffs’ request for dismissal with prejudice as to all parties and all causes of actions was granted on June 7, 2022.  This case is dropped from the Court’s calendar. 


12.  CU22-086313             ROSANNE PALMER vs. RENA MARIE KAIN et al

No appearances are required.  The case is at issue and a jury trial is set as follows:

Length: 5-day jury trial.

Trial Date: August 1, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: July 21, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: July 10, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


13.  CU22-086316             STATE FARM vs. BRIAN ROBERT HARTMAN

The case-management conference is continued to October 17, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from the Defendant.  No appearances are required. 


14.  CU22-086320             JAROD L. LUNEAU vs. CALIFORNIA RELIEF LLC et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 17, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Defendants have been served but Defendant California Relief LLC has not yet answered.  No appearances are required. 


This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  Attorneys and parties are urged to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 4.00.8B.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the Nevada City and Truckee courthouses are currently required to wear a face covering in all public areas of the courthouse and in shared workspaces. (See Executive Order 205, posted on the Court’s website). 

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  YOU MAY APPEAR VIA VIDEO BY ARRANGING A REMOTE APPEARANCE AT LEAST TWO COURT DAYS PRIOR TO HEARING BY EMAILING: NCCOUNTER@NCCOURT.NET.


Case Management Conferences

July 25, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

 

1.      CU0000020                Haehn, Rosella M. v. Haehn, Eric P. et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes it has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from the Defendant.  The Court’s file is also missing a case-management conference statement from Plaintiff and an application to publish for “all persons unknown.”  No appearances are required. 


2.      CU0000024                Smith, Ricky D. v. Harris, Makala J.

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes it has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from the sole Defendant in this matter.  No appearances are required. 


3.      CU0000025                Nevada City Botanicals LLC v. MMR Books, LLC

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes it has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from Defendants Jason Ramsey or Elisabeth Ramsey.  No appearances are required. 


4.      CU0000031                Costello, Richard v. Kennedy, Austin et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that Defendant Austin Kennedy has been served but has not yet filed an answer.   There is no proof of service in the Court’s file for Defendant State of California. No appearances are required. 


5.      CU20-084670             STATE FARM vs. DAVID MATTHEW YOUNG

No appearances are required.  No jury fees have been posted in this matter.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 2-day court trial.

Trial Date: July 18, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: July 7, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: June 26, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


6.      CU20-084971             JERRY TITTLE vs. THE TACK ROOM et al

No appearances are required.  No jury fees have been posted in this matter.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 8-day court trial.

Trial Date: July 18, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: July 7, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: June 26, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


7.      CU21-085307             SONYA SOKOLOW vs. PATRICIA IRISH TRUST et al

Appearance by counsel for all parties is required.  The Court notes that Defendant/Cross-Complainant Patricia Irish Trust filed its cross-complaint more than one year ago and has still not served any of the named Cross-Defendants.  The Court requires a status update on Defendant/Cross-Complainant’s efforts to serve the same.


8.      CU21-085699             AFT INVESTORS, LLC vs. CHARLES R SMITH et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that, pursuant to a recently executed stipulation, a second-amended cross-complaint is pending filing.  The case is not yet at issue.  No appearances are required. 


9.      CU21-085875             JENNIFER KIGGINS vs. CIRINOS AT MAIN STREET et al

Appearances by counsel for both parties is required.  Previous minutes reflect that the parties may wish to set trial dates at this hearing.  The Court requests a status update as Defendants have not yet answered or been defaulted and the case does not appear to be at issue.


10.  CU21-086080             EVA J. RUBEN vs. JACQUELINE ELAINE PAYE et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that there is presently a pending motion to strike and the case is not yet at issue.  No appearances are required.


11.  CU22-086318             CHARLES OSHER vs. MATHEW LAMARK et al

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that it does not have proofs of service on file for either Defendant.  The case is not at issue.  No appearances are required.


12.  CU22-086321             DAMONDRE WILSON vs. TERESA ELAINE MONTANA

The case-management conference is continued to October 10, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that it does not have a proof of service on file for the Defendant.  The case is not at issue.  Counsel for Plaintiff is ordered to timely file a case-management conference statement prior to the continued hearing date.  No appearances are required.


13.  CU22-086322             KEVIN MCELWEE vs. ALTA SIERRA AIRPORT OWNERS

The case-management conference is continued to September 12, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes that all named Defendants have answered the complaint and the case appears to be at issue but notes there are no case-management conference statements on file from any of the parties.  Counsels for both Plaintiff and Defendants are ordered to timely file a case-management conference statement prior to the continued hearing date.  No appearances are required.

-----------------

These are the Court’s tentative rulings.  Attorneys and parties are urged to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 4.00.8B.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the Nevada City and Truckee courthouses are currently required to wear a face covering in all public areas of the courthouse and in shared workspaces. (See Executive Order 205, posted on the Court’s website). 

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  YOU MAY APPEAR VIA VIDEO BY ARRANGING A REMOTE APPEARANCE AT LEAST TWO COURT DAYS PRIOR TO HEARING BY EMAILING: NCCOUNTER@NCCOURT.NET.


Case Management Conferences

July 18, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

 

1.      CL22-086237             CLARK PEST CONTROL, INC. vs. ALFRED BULF et al

The case-management conference is continued to September 19, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes it has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from the sole Defendant in this matter.  No appearances are required. 


2.      CU0000011                Fackrell, Amber v. Western Grain & Milling Inc. et al

The case-management conference is continued to September 19, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes Defendant Pitman Farms has been served but has not appeared or otherwise been defaulted.  No appearances are required. 


3.      CU0000014                Dupell, David R v. Turner, Margaret F. et al

No appearances are required.  The case is at issue and trial is set as follows:

Length: 2-day court trial.

Trial Date: May 2, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: April 21, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: April 10, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


4.      CU0000015                Vanotten v. Nevada Meadows et al

5.      CU0000016                Vanotten v. Nevada Meadows et al

Appearance is required by Plaintiff’s counsel.  The Court notes Plaintiff appears to have filed two nearly identical complaints against the same Defendants on the same date and requires an explanation.  The Court also notes it has not yet received a proof of service for Defendant Nevada Meadows. 


6.      CU0000023                Britton v. Mountain Valley Child & Family Services, Inc.

No appearances are required.  No jury fees have been posted in this matter.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 12-day court trial.

Trial Date: June 20, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: June 9, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: May 22, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


7.      CU17-082689             LYNCH vs. GONSALVES

Appearances are required by counsel and parties to discuss dates for trial.  The Court notes this matter is nearly five years old and that trial dates have been set and vacated on multiple occasions.


8.      CU19-084105             ANNE ROSEN vs. THE HOLBROOKE HOTEL LLC

Appearances by counsel for both parties are required.  The case is at issue and the Court requires a status update as to settlement negotiations and mediation.  If the parties are unable to reach a settlement, the Court intends to set the matter for a 4-day court trial.  The Court notes that jury fees do not appear to have been posted.


9.      CU20-084721             VALENTINO vs. VALLEY PACIFIC

Appearances by counsel for both parties are required.  The case is at issue and the Court requires a status update as to mediation efforts.  If the parties are unable to reach a settlement, the Court intends to set the matter for a 7-day court trial.  The Court notes that jury fees have not been posted.


10.  CU20-084727             WARREN LIPPERT et al vs. B&W RESORTS, INC. et al

No appearances are required.  No jury fees have been posted in this matter.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 7-day court trial.

Trial Date: May 30, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: May 19, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: May 8, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


11.  CU20-084785             RYAN RAY SAY vs. CLAUDE MURRY CONLEY

Appearances by counsel for both parties are required.  The case is at issue. The Court notes a mediation brief was filed by Defendant and requires a status update as to mediation or other settlement efforts.  If the parties are unable to reach a settlement, the Court intends to set the matter for a 4-day court trial.  The Court notes that jury fees have not been posted.


12.  CU20-084805             COLE DAVIS vs. SIERRA NEVADA et al

The case-management conference is continued to September 19, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  Updated case-management conference statements for this hearing are not presently in the Court’s file.  Counsel for all parties are directed to provide updated statements prior to the continued hearing date.  No appearances are required. 


13.  CU20-084928             FARRELL v. MALLO

The Court notes this case is on for a dismissal hearing and that there is an executed settlement agreement on file.  Per the Court’s direction at the hearing on March 14, 2022, unless there is an appearance from the parties, the Court will dismiss the matter without prejudice and retain jurisdiction over the settlement.


14.  CU21-085313             SAUNDRA PRATT et al vs. THERESA FRANKLIN

Appearances are required by counsel for both parties.  The Court notes that a notice of settlement was filed with the Court on May 17, 2022, indicating a request for dismissal would be filed no later than June 30, 2022.  No such request for dismissal has been filed and the Court requires a status update.


15.  CU21-085655             FINDLEY vs. ANDERSON et al

Appearances by all counsel are required.  The Court requires a status update as the settlement negotiations and mediation.


16.  CU21-085657             CAROLE GEORGE vs. ELENA LARSON

Appearance by Plaintiff’s counsel is required.  The Court notes it has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from Defendant in this matter.  Plaintiff’s counsel indicates he may need to serve by publication; however, there is no such application on file.  The Court requires an update as to Plaintiff’s efforts to serve the Defendant.


17.  CU21-085757             MARGARET C. BRUNER vs. MELISSA MOHLER et al

Appearance by Plaintiff’s counsel is required.  The Court notes the Defendants appear to have been served with the second-amended complaint on or about February 10, 2022, but neither have either answered or otherwise been defaulted.


18.  CU21-086081             THERESE M. MURRAY vs. BETH C. MCLAUGHLIN

The case-management conference is continued to September 19, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The case is not at issue.  The Court notes Defendant has appeared and filed a motion for change of venue, which is currently pending hearing, but has not yet filed an answer to the complaint.  No appearances are required.


19.  CU21-086087             OLIVIA L. WILLIAMS vs. CYD F. DOLLIVER et al

No appearances are required.  The case is at issue and trial is set as follows:

Length: 2-day court trial.

Trial Date: July 11, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: June 30, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: June 19, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


20.  CU21-086090             WATKINS vs. GOLDEN EMPIRE NURSING et al

No appearances are required.  Jury fees have been posted.  The case is at issue and a trial is set as follows:

Length: 6-day jury trial.

Trial Date: June 6, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: May 26, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: May 15, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


21.  CU22-086188             PARALLEL CONSTRUCTORS LLC vs. CLAY RILEY

No appearances are required.  Jury fees have been posted.  The case is at issue and trial is set as follows:

Length: 4-day jury trial.

Trial Date: July 11, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: June 30, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: June 19, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


22.  CU22-086196             JOHN BENNETT vs. LAKE WILDWOOD ASSOCIATION

No appearances are required.  Jury fees have been posted.  The case is at issue and trial is set as follows:

Length: 8-day jury trial.

Trial Date: July 18, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: July 7, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: June 26, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


23.  CU22-086197             RAUL OLIVAS vs. GOLDEN 1 CU et al

Appearance is required by Plaintiff’s counsel.  The Court notes this case is approximately five months old and the Defendants have still not been served or otherwise appeared.  The Court requires an update as to Plaintiff’s efforts to serve the named Defendants.


24.  CU22-086305             VALENTINA N. MASTERZ vs. GREGORY J. DIAZ et al

This case has been dropped from calendar.


This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  Attorneys and parties are urged to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 4.00.8B.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the Nevada City and Truckee courthouses are highly encouraged to wear a face covering in all public areas of the courthouse and in shared workspaces. (See Executive Order 205, posted on the Court’s website). 

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  YOU MAY APPEAR VIA VIDEO BY ARRANGING SUCH ZOOM APPEARANCE AT LEAST TWO COURT DAYS PRIOR TO HEARING BY EMAILING: NCCOUNTER@NCCOURT.NET.


 

Case Management Conferences

July 11, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. 6

1.      CL22-086230             MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY vs. RICHARD PARKS

The case-management conference is continued to September 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes it has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from Cross-Defendant Rickets to Defendant/Cross-Complainant Parks’ cross-complaint.  No appearances are required. 


2.      CU20-084962             WEITZ et al vs. GOLDEN GATE et al

The case-management conference is continued to September 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes it has not yet received an answer from Defendant/Cross-Defendant Timothy Ballard to Defendant Golden Gate’s cross-complaint.  No appearances are required. 


3.      CU21-085164             CHIRAYU PATEL vs. VAMAYA INC

No appearances are required.  The case is at issue and trial is set as follows:

Length: 6-day jury trial.

Trial Date: February 28, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: February 17, 2023 at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: February 6, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


4.      CU21-085853             DONALD E DELAHUNT vs. RALEY'S

The case-management conference is continued to September 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes it has not yet received an answer from Defendant to the first amended complaint and the case is not at issue.  The Court also notes that it granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement on June 10, 2022, and that the case is pending hearing on the final settlement on August 12, 2022.  No appearances are required. 


5.      CU21-085875             JENNIFER KIGGINS vs. CIRINOS AT MAIN STREET et al

Appearances are required from counsel for both Plaintiff and Defendant.  The Court requires a status update as to mediation between the parties.  The Court also notes that it does not have an answer on file from Defendant Raley’s to Plaintiff’s first amended complaint.


6.      CU21-086078             KATIE BRUNTLAND vs. DIGNITY HEALTH et al

Appearance is required by Plaintiff’s counsel.  The complaint in this matter was filed on or about June 23, 2021, and Defendant Kimberlee Naisbitt has still not been served or otherwise appeared in this matter.  The Court requires a status update on Plaintiff’s efforts to serve this Defendant.


7.      CU22-086160             KEVIN MALONE vs. WILLIAM FERREIRA

The case-management conference is continued to September 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes it has not yet received a proof of service for or answer from Defendant William Ferreira.  Plaintiff indicates it may need to serve by publication; however, there is no such application on file.  No appearances are required for this hearing but Plaintiff’s counsel will be required to appear at the continued case-management conference date to provide the Court a status/update as to its efforts to serve the Defendant.


8.      CU22-086165             CHRISTINE YOUNG vs. TAMARA LYNN TENORIO

Appearance is required by Plaintiff’s counsel.  The Court notes this case is approximately six months old and Defendant has not been served with the summons or complaint.  The Court requests Plaintiff’s counsel provide a status update as to its efforts to serve the Defendant.


9.      CU22-086182             TERRY MCGINNIS vs. SARAH ELIZABETH LUPYAK et al

No appearances are required.  Jury fees have been paid.  The case is at issue and trial is set as follows:

Length: 12-day jury trial.

Trial Date: April 25, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: April 14, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: April 3, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


10.  CU22-086184             MOE vs. CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM FROMLAK

No appearances are required.  Jury fees have been paid.  The case is at issue and trial is set as follows:

Length: 5-day jury trial.

Trial Date: May 2, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: April 21, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: April 10, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


11.  CU22-086285             BULLOCK vs. ATRIA MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC

No appearances are required.  Jury fees have not been paid.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 6-day court trial.

Trial Date: May 2, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: April 21, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: April 10, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


12.  CU22-086292             BLACKBURN vs. ALBERT FRANK ROSSITTO et al

No appearances are required.  Jury fees have not been paid.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 7-day court trial.

Trial Date: May 16, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: May 5, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: April 24, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


13.  CU22-086294             HYATT et al vs. KYLE ANDREW SPAULDING et al

The case-management conference is continued to September 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes this is a first case-management conference and that both Defendants appear to have been served but have not appeared or otherwise been defaulted.


14.  CU22-086295             MITCHELL vs. MITCHELL

The case-management conference is continued to September 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes this is a first case-management conference and that Defendant James Mitchell has filed an answer in the matter.  The case is, however, still not at issue since Plaintiff’s complaint also lists “All Persons Unknown” as a Defendant to this partition action.  The Court notes there is no application on file to serve “All Persons Unknown” by publication.


15.  CU22-086296             KELLY vs. SEAN M HUNTLEY 1992 TRUST et al

The case-management conference is continued to September 5, 2022, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.  The Court notes this is a first case-management conference and that both Defendants appear to have been served but have not appeared or otherwise been defaulted.


16.  TCU20-7553              CAROLYN GALLAGHER vs. JEFFREY CAMP

No appearances are required.  The case is at issue and the Court will be resetting trial dates.  A review of the Court’s electronic file indicates jury fees have not been paid.  Trial dates were previously set in this matter to be heard at the Truckee Courthouse but Judge Durant has disqualified herself pursuant to Ca. Code of Civil Procedure Section 170.1.  The previously scheduled dates set for hearings at the Truckee Courthouse will be vacated and reset in Nevada City as follows:

Length: 7-day court trial.

Trial Date: March 14, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: March 3, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: February 20, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


17.  TCU20-7672              DYLON STOREY vs. TAHOE SIERRA EYE & OPTICAL

No appearances are required.  Jury fees have not been paid.  The case is at issue and a court trial is set as follows:

Length: 5-day court trial.

Trial Date: February 28, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Pre-Trial Conference: February 17, 2023, at 11:00 a.m., in Department 6.

Mandatory Settlement Conference: February 6, 2023, at 10:00 a.m., in Department 6.


18.  TCU21-7785              KATHY BOW et al vs. CEBRIDGE TELECOM CA LLC et al

Appearances are required by both Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ counsel to discuss the proposed briefing schedule for Defendant’s anticipated renewed motion to compel arbitration.  The Court notes the date proposed in Plaintiff’s CMC statement for filing of the motion (July 8, 2022) will occur before the actual CMC hearing.


This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  Attorneys and parties are urged to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing, notify the opposing side if they intend to appear at the hearing the court day preceding the hearing.  Local Rule 4.00.8B.  All persons, two years of age and older, who enter the Nevada City and Truckee courthouses must wear a face covering in all public areas of the courthouse and in shared workspaces. (See Executive Order 192, posted on the Court’s website). 

PERSONAL APPEARANCES ARE PERMITTED.  YOU MAY APPEAR VIA VIDEO BY ARRANGING SUCH ZOOM APPEARANCE AT LEAST TWO COURT DAYS PRIOR TO HEARING BY EMAILING: NCCOUNTER@NCCOURT.NET.


 

8-4-2022 Dept. 3 Guardianship Calendar

P13-15541 IN RE SIERRA M.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

P14-15621 IN RE ELLIE S.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

P14-15658 IN RE ALEXIS E-M.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

P17-16092 IN RE KIMBER R.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

P17-16146 IN RE LEAH B.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

P18-16289 IN RE JOSHUA B.

The Court has not received the Confidential Guardianship Status Report from the Guardians.  The matter is set for hearing on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Personal appearance is required.

P19-16487 IN RE EMMA C.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

P19-16491 IN RE EMMA M.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

P19-16492 IN RE MIAH M.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

P20-16789 IN RE RYDER M.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interest of the minor.  Your appearance on August 4, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary.  The next annual review hearing is set for August 3, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department III of the Superior Court of California, County of Nevada.  Please check the website 2 business days prior to the hearing date to verify if your appearance is necessary.

PR0000017 IN RE REGIE R.

No tentative ruling. Personal appearance is required.

PR0000018 IN RE JEFFREY G.

No tentative ruling. Personal appearance is required.

Friday August 5, 2022 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference Calendar

Family Law Status Conference standard order terms.

 

The following terms apply to all of the below cases and are incorporated by reference into the Tentative Decision for each case.   Review them carefully.

  1. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 8 or by email to nccounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 08/05/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  2. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 08/05/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary UNLESS the order in your case requires that appearance.  
  3. Both parties are advised that no Judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  4. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  5. If both parties want to opt out of further status conference, each must notify the Clerk at nccounter@nccourt.net, with a copy to the other party. Unless both parties opt out at least three (3) court days before the status conference date, appearance at the next status conference is required. 
  6. If both parties opt out of the status conference, the orders to serve and file the above documents will be vacated at the time that this opt out is effective.  These documents will still be required before the case can proceed further. The Court can place the case back on the Status Conference calendar and reinstate a filing deadline for these documents on request of either party or by the Court giving notice of a new Status Conference date.
  7. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.   

______________________________________________

 

 

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL08-005969

 

Petitioner:

Teri Owens

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Dennis Owens

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of by Posting (or by other means if that has been accomplished).
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015339

 

Petitioner:

Angela Watson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Kenneth Watson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

 

This case was filed on 08/28/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above.  If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250.

  1.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  2. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015936

 

Petitioner:

Gretchen Ramos

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Steven Ramos

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015947

 

Petitioner:

Shannen Anderson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Richard Anderson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016258

 

Petitioner:

Matthew Aldrich

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Angela Aldrich

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016271

 

Petitioner:

Haley Mullen

Attorney: Sara Thompson

Respondent:

Nicolas Hyczar

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016274

 

Petitioner:

Robert Corrigan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jill Corrigan

Attorney: Tamara Grosvenor

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
    2. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
    3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016318

 

Petitioner:

Teresa Sweeny-Cutter

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Rick Cutter

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016330

 

Petitioner:

Cynthia Lane

Attorney: Kristen Alexander

Respondent:

Jeffrey Lane

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016593

 

Petitioner:

Kristen Rentschler

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Connor Stafford

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016609

 

Petitioner:

Tazarian Graham

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Lilynna Graham

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Sum
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016610

 

Petitioner:

Colleen Norman

Attorney: Candence Gettys

Respondent:

Robert Norman

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016613

 

Petitioner:

Clare Moran

Attorney: Sara Thompson

Respondent:

Jackson Moran

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016623

 

Petitioner:

Matthew Aaron Sutherlin

Attorney: Jennifer Granger

Respondent:

Jessica Nicole Sutherlin

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016627

 

Petitioner:

Karla Miller

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Doug Miller

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Corrected Proof of Service of Summons and Petition package. Proof of Service as filed shows that this was served before the case was opened.  If corrected Proof of Service is not possible, re-serve Summons and Petition package. 
    2. Once corrected Proof of Service has been filed, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016635

 

Petitioner:

Jason Holt

Attorney: Kristen Sellers

Respondent:

Danielle Champeau

Attorney:  Megan Sasaki

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016655

 

Petitioner:

Christine Lapressle

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Kevin Lapressle

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016657

 

Petitioner:

Jeffrey Weld

Attorney: Candence Gettys

Respondent:

Ellen Weld

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016678

 

Petitioner:

Kelly Van de Vegte

Attorney: James Moore

Respondent:

Erik Van de Vegte

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons on Amended Petition, OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. Once Proof of Service of Amended Petition has occurred, one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner at least 30 days after service of Amended Petition.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016963

 

Petitioner:

Aaron Hill

Attorney: W. Gregory Klein

Respondent:

Shelly Hill

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.  
  3. The Court notes that a Memo that Civil Case is at Issue has been filed by Petitioner. Pending status conference may be vacated at the trial setting conference.
  4. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  5. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016964

 

Petitioner:

Steven Fidler

Attorney: W. Gregory Klein

Respondent:

Sherri Blackwell Fidler

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016965

 

Petitioner:

Richard Evangelista

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Heidi Tyra

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016969

 

Petitioner:

Cody Johnson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Joycelyne Johnson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required: 
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016974

 

Petitioner:

Ziv Cohen

Attorney: Candence Gettys

Respondent:

Rachel Cohen

Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016980

 

Petitioner:

David SInclair

Attorney: Kathy Lindsay

Respondent:

Ashley SInclair

Attorney: Jennifer Granger

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016983

 

Petitioner:

Rosheen Ward-Nulph

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Cory Nulph

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016984

 

Petitioner:

Susan Valeria Roberts

Attorney: W. Gregory Klein

Respondent:

Phillip Anthony Roberts

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016985

 

Petitioner:

David Dearman

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Mandy Dearman

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016988

 

Petitioner:

Geoffrey Lyons

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Barbera Joffe

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016992

 

Petitioner:

Nathan Scott Thomas

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Colleen Lee Thomas

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016995

 

Petitioner:

Melisa Ann Mistler

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Michael Yates

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-016999

 

Petitioner:

Lance M. Vieira

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Carla M. Vieira

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-017003

 

Petitioner:

Edoardo Taroni

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Erin M. Zajac

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents. 
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-017004

 

Petitioner:

Govinda McComb-Bryant

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Crinan Bryant

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-017010

 

Petitioner:

Andrea A. Marshall

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Hayden K. Marshall

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required: 
    1. Corrected Proof of Service of Summons.  Proof of substituted service was filed without declaration of due dilligence. Also box was checked for Mail and Acknwledgment service, but no FL-117 was filed.  If Proof of Service cannot be corrected, re-serve Summons and Petition package.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. At least 30 days after correct service, one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-017014

 

Petitioner:

Cheryl Alexander

Attorney: Joel Garcia

Respondent:

Curtis Alexander

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. Corrected FL-141 from Respondent. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.  Caption shows Respondent’s address and signature but  boxes checked are for service of Petitioner’s documents.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-017019

 

Petitioner:

Alana Lucia

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Vince Lucia

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-017020

 

Petitioner:

Shane Colbert

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Athea Colbert

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-017022

 

Petitioner:

Sagi Seagel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Summer Wind

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 08/05/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL22-017097

 

Petitioner:

Melanie I. Sandlin

Attorney: Nancy Christie

Respondent:

John J. Sandlin

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/03/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/03/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by referen _________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

 

Friday July 1, 2022 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference Calendar

Family Law Status Conference standard order terms. 

The following terms apply to all of the below cases and are incorporated by reference into the Tentative Decision for each case.   Review them carefully.

  1. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 8 or by email to nccounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 07/01/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  2. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 07/01/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary UNLESS the order in your case requires that appearance.  
  3. Both parties are advised that no Judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  4. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  5. If both parties want to opt out of further status conference, each must notify the Clerk at nccounter@nccourt.net, with a copy to the other party. Unless both parties opt out at least three (3) court days before the status conference date, appearance at the next status conference is required. 
  6. If both parties opt out of the status conference, the orders to serve and file the above documents will be vacated at the time that this opt out is effective.  These documents will still be required before the case can proceed further. The Court can place the case back on the Status Conference calendar and reinstate a filing deadline for these documents on request of either party or by the Court giving notice of a new Status Conference date.
  7. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.   

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-014900

 

Petitioner:

Cheryl Glace

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Mark Glace

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The Court notes that the following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015070

 

Petitioner:

Jeannine Horton

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Randy Bodenhamer

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The Court notes that the following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015087

 

Petitioner:

Adison G. Clark

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Melissa J. Crowder

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

This case was filed on 05/15/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above.  If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250. 

  1.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  2. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015129

 

Petitioner:

Laura Link

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

John Link

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

This case was filed on 06/05/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above.  If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250. 

  1.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons and Petition package OR request from Petitioner to dismiss the case.
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. 
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package has been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  2. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015196

 

Petitioner:

William Andrews

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Shannon Andrews

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.  
  2.  The Court notes that following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015204

 

Petitioner:

Cassandra Metz

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Logan Metz

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The Court notes that following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015234

 

Petitioner:

Harmony Wood

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

David Wood

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. This case was filed on 07/19/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above.  If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250. 
  3. The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  4. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  5. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015248

 

Petitioner:

Hans Werner Schneider

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jennifer Schneider

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1.  Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The Court notes that following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015276

 

Petitioner:

Lisa Wilkinson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Andrew Wilkinson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.  
  2.  The Court notes that following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015278

 

Petitioner:

Jessica James Moulton

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

James Noland Moulton

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.  
  2.  The Court notes that following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015312

 

Petitioner:

David McGirr

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Gina Fierro-McGirr

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

This case was filed on 08/16/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above.  If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250. 

  1.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  2. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015502

 

Petitioner:

Christina Carman

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Anthony Edward Carman

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

This case was filed on 11/25/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above.  If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250. 

  1.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  2. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015506

 

Petitioner:

Merianne Carlisle

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

John Carlisle

Attorney: Jeffrey Guyton

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015509

 

Petitioner:

Mohamed Aboubacar

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Peggy Ann Peterson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The Court notes that the following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
    2. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have information for the date of delivery of the documents. 
    3. Corrected FL-141 from Respondent. Current FL-141 does not have information for the date of delivery of the documents. 
    4. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
    5. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
    6. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015518

 

Petitioner:

Sagan Sutera

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Michael Sutera

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The Court notes that the following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-01557

 

Petitioner:

Kathleen Lynn Johnson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

David W. Johnson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
    3. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
    4. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015629

 

Petitioner:

Nicole LaSpina

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Darrell Landingham

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2. The Court notes that the following are still required:
    1. Corrected Proof of Service.
      1. Proof of Service filed only shows service of Summons and Notice of Family Law Status Conference. Need Proof of Service showing service of FL-100 Petition and BLANK FL_120 Response OR re-serve entire Summons and Petition package.   OR
      2. Request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR
      3. Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents. 
    3. Once correct service of process has been made, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015661

 

Petitioner:

Debora Sanchez

Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

Respondent:

Mario Sanchez

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015685

 

Petitioner:

Christopher Lee Hensley

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Teresa Hensley

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package have been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015932

 

Petitioner:

Stacy Darren Miller

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Angela Michelle Miller

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.   
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have information for the delivery method of the documents. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016192

 

Petitioner:

Tawni Greenidge

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Michael Greenidge

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. 
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016565

 

Petitioner:

Mark G. Whiting

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Virginia L. Whiting

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package has been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016569

 

Petitioner:

Jamie Rae Hanf

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Adam James Hanf

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.  
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016572

 

Petitioner:

Alissa Katherine Passalis

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Bill Tom Passalis

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package has been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016573

 

Petitioner:

Jeffrey Robert Daly

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Trina Thorsen

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016575

 

Petitioner:

Alexander R. Hill

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Sabrina Lee Hill

Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have information for the date and delivery method of the documents. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016582

 

Petitioner:

Anthony Gonzales

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jessica Renee Jennings

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
    2. Respondent shall serve and file MC-040 Notice of Change of Address or contact information with her correct contact information within 30 days.
  3. Other than the correction of Respondent’s address, the required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016605

 

Petitioner:

Michelle Jarrett

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Shaun Case

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016885

 

Petitioner:

Cheyanna Bone

Attorney: Gregory Silva

Respondent:

John B. Kaufmann

Attorney: Joseph J. Bell

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016915

 

Petitioner:

Brittany Scarbrough

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Shawna Baldwin-Scarbrough

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package have been served, the  Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016921

 

Petitioner:

Brady Turner

Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

Respondent:

Angela Turner

Attorney: D. Laurence Montgomery

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016924

 

Petitioner:

Sarah Ann Edwards

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Nicholas John Edwards

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016929

 

Petitioner:

Taylor Severe

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

James Palombo

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016930

 

Petitioner:

Juliana Rose Berglund

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Timothy Purdy

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016932

 

Petitioner:

Ryan Litke

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Patricia Marratto-Litke

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016934

 

Petitioner:

Tara Noel LaCount

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Sean Russell Spittler

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package has been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016935

 

Petitioner:

Anthony Brenes

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Reana Maria Brenes

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package have been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016937

 

Petitioner:

Daphne West Jackson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Kurt C. Jackson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016943

 

Petitioner:

Marshall Olson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Krisanne Olson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016949

 

Petitioner:

Sheajuli Dianne Lingman-Smith

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Brandon James Smith

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package has been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016950

 

Petitioner:

Willard Ernst

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Janelle Ernst

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package has been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016952

 

Petitioner:

Thomas Roberts

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Lauren Brookens

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016955

 

Petitioner:

Jessica Michelle Eldredge

Attorney: Laura Strasser

Respondent:

Kerry Eldredge

Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016957

 

Petitioner:

Marina Avdeeva Smith

Attorney: Andrei Romanenko

Respondent:

Evan James Smith

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 01/06/2023, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  Once the Summons and Petition package has been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 01/06/2023, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016960

 

Petitioner:

Chantelle Paulina Neep

Attorney: Denise Dirks (Ltd Scope)

Respondent:

Tyson Paul Taylor

Attorney: Joseph Willimore

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 07/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016966

 

Petitioner:

Alicia Marie Brott

Attorney: Julia Perkovich

Respondent:

Nathan Charles Brott

Attorney: Chandra Miller

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The parties have stipulated that the case will be handled in collaborative practice process. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

June 3, 2022  Department 3 Family Law  Status Conference Calendar

 

 

Family Law Status Conference standard order terms. 

The following terms apply to all of the below cases and are incorporated by reference into the Tentative Decision for each case.   Review them carefully.

  1. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 8 or by email to nccounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 03/04/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  2. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 03/04/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary UNLESS the order in your case requires that appearance.  
  3. Both parties are advised that no Judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  4. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  5. If both parties want to opt out of further status conference, each must notify the Clerk at nccounter@nccourt.net, with a copy to the other party. Unless both parties opt out at least three (3) court days before the status conference date, appearance at the next status conference is required. 
  6. If both parties opt out of the status conference, the orders to serve and file the above documents will be vacated at the time that this opt out is effective.  These documents will still be required before the case can proceed further. The Court can place the case back on the Status Conference calendar and reinstate a filing deadline for these documents on request of either party or by the Court giving notice of a new Status Conference date.
  7. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.   

______________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-014860

 

Petitioner:

Cheri Lynn Smith

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Samuel Raymond Smith

Attorney:  Self-Represented

 

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.   The Court notes that this case was filed and served more than three years ago.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015521

 

Petitioner:

Sharlyn Zufelt

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Kenneth Dolan

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. This case was filed on 12/09/20219, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above.  If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250.
  5. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015727

 

Petitioner:

Catherine Adams

Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

Respondent:

Richard Adams

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. This is the 5th status conference. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
    2. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
    3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015839

 

Petitioner:

Kimberly Susan Starkey

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Eric R. Starkey

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015875

 

Petitioner:

Stephanie Diane Ferreira

Attorney: Chandra Miller

Respondent:

William Dean Ferreira

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Judgement has been entered and the case is at issue. The Status Conference is dropped. Parties will proceed on At Issue Memo and Counter Memo.
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015879

 

Petitioner:

Renee Renoir

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Serffen Hawkinssnell

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016110

 

Petitioner:

Carey Allen

Attorney: William Phillips

Respondent:

Victoria Allen

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016130

 

Petitioner:

Beauy Grady

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Francesca Grady

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016146

 

Petitioner:

Ashley Morris

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Brandy Morris

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-106147

 

Petitioner:

Meritt McClure

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Steve McClure

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016160

 

Petitioner:

Jeremiah Watkins

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jolene King

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. 
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016168

 

Petitioner:

Leah Fowler

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Cory Fowler

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016488

 

Petitioner:

Rosemary Lynch

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Daniel Lynch

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. 
    2. Corrected FL-141 from Respondent. Current FL-141 was not signed by party or by counsel of record. 
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016502

 

Petitioner:

Laura Witt

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Darryl Witt

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016507

 

Petitioner:

Robert Dicklinson

Attorney: `Self-Represented

Respondent:

Sandra Acuna

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-0161530

 

Petitioner:

Lawrence Honer

Attorney: W. Gregory Klein

Respondent:

Barbara Honer

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016542

 

Petitioner:

Norma Trump

Attorney: William Phillips

Respondent:

Peter Trump

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.   Waiver of Preliminary Disclosure by Petitioner is not permitted.
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016566

 

Petitioner:

Robert Anthony Bringolf

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Hannah Kay Bringolf

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-130 Appearance, Stipulation and Waivers
    2. Proof of service of Final Declarations of Disclosure by each party OR waiver of those by FL-144 signed by both parties.
    3. Re-submission of FL-180 (with attachments) and FL-190 (with stamped envelopes).
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016810

 

Petitioner:

Tomi Hadley

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Dylan Hadley

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
    3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016861

 

Petitioner:

Valerie Aura

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Randy J. Miller

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016890

 

Petitioner:

Jesse Douglas Ayer

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Amy Ayer

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents. 
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016891

 

Petitioner:

Faith Martin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Austin Green

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016892

 

Petitioner:

Nick Wilczek

Attorney: Nancy Christie

Respondent:

Fiona Wilson

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016906

 

Petitioner:

Krystal Harlander

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Collin Harlander

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents. 
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016907

 

Petitioner:

Tina Everhart

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

James Everhart

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016913

 

Petitioner:

Claudia Moreno Samora

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Rafael Jurado Martinez

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Corrected FL-141 from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have information for the date of delivery of the documents. 
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 06/03/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016914

 

Petitioner:

Alexandria Lurene Nipper

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

David Walden Nipper

Attorney:  Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 12/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.  
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 12/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

 

__________________________________________________________________

 

May 6, 2022 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference Calendar

Family Law Status Conference standard order terms. 

 

The following terms apply to all of the below cases and are incorporated by reference into the Tentative Decision for each case.   Review them carefully.

A.      If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 8 or by email to nccounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 03/04/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.

B.      If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 03/04/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary UNLESS the order in your case requires that appearance.  

C.      Both parties are advised that no Judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.

D.     If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.

E.      If both parties want to opt out of further status conference, each must notify the Clerk at nccounter@nccourt.net, with a copy to the other party. Unless both parties opt out at least three (3) court days before the status conference date, appearance at the next status conference is required. 

F.       If both parties opt out of the status conference, the orders to serve and file the above documents will be vacated at the time that this opt out is effective.  These documents will still be required before the case can proceed further. The Court can place the case back on the Status Conference calendar and reinstate a filing deadline for these documents on request of either party or by the Court giving notice of a new Status Conference date.

G.     Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.   

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL19-015513

 

Petitioner:

Devon Merritt

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jason Merritt

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.       Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.

2.      The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.

b.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.

c.       Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.

3.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015680

 

Petitioner:

Elizabeth Uelman

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Joseph Uelman

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015691

 

Petitioner:

Amy Cassidy

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Bryan Cassidy

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015699

 

Petitioner:

Kevin Doyle

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jerrilee Doyle

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015724

 

Petitioner:

Candi Mickelson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Scott Mickelson

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-015796

 

Petitioner:

Kathleen Wiedeman

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Keith Wiedeman

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The Court notes that Petitioner filed an At Issue Memorandum even through there is no Response on file. The At Issue Memo is ordered stricken.

4.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

5.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016092

 

Petitioner:

Denise Styler

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Lisa Styler

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016094

 

Petitioner:

Katrina Daniel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Justin Carbone

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-220 Response from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016117

 

Petitioner:

Mirian Martinez-Ramirez

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Arturo Aguilera-Aranda

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.

b.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.

c.       The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016120

 

Petitioner:

Amanda Roberts

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jeffrey Roberts

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Corrected FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016121

 

Petitioner:

Michael Kent

Attorney: Candence Gettys

Respondent:

Toni Kent

Attorney: Nancy Christie

1.      Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 

2.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL20-016124

 

Petitioner:

Bodhi Dulac

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Amanda Dulac

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016407

 

Petitioner:

Sean Chynoweth

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Catherine Chynoweth

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016412

 

Petitioner:

Lauren OBrien

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Steven Poncelet

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.

b.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.

c.       The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016415

 

Petitioner:

Morgan Phelan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Sheila Phelan

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.

b.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.

c.       The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016420

 

Petitioner:

Kelly Parks

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Steven Avery

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016431

 

Petitioner:

Mary Long

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Donald Edelstein

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 05/06/2022 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Amended Petition and Summons on Amended Petition. (Proof of Service as filed does not state that).   

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       Once there is a Proof of Service showing Proof of Service of Amended Petition Either FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016440

 

Petitioner:

Kelly Trueman

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Anders Gustavsson

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016441

 

Petitioner:

Alysha Shipman-Sleeth

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Owen Sleeth

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Corrected FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.

b.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.

c.       Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.

d.      The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016445

 

Petitioner:

Manuel Lopez

Attorney: Candence Gettys

Respondent:

Maria Diaz

Attorney: Kathy Lindsay

1.      Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 

2.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016454

 

Petitioner:

Sara Mitchell

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Matthew MItchell

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Corrected FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      Corrected FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.  

c.       Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.

d.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.

e.      Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016462

 

Petitioner:

Danetta Gonzales-Coleman

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Robert Coleman

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016464

 

Petitioner:

Kenley Jones

Attorney: Sean Patrick

Respondent:

Barry Jones

Attorney: W. Gregory Klein

1.      Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 

2.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016490

 

Petitioner:

Brooke Mayfield

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Owen Brown

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. 

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016535

 

Petitioner:

Kelly Melendez

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Michael Melendez

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016767

 

Petitioner:

Dianna Alley-Siebecke

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

David Siebecke

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016772

 

Petitioner:

Katherine Wilkes

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Maurice Wilkes

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016781

 

Petitioner:

Nelly Nichols

Attorney: Laura B. Strasser (Ltd. Scope)

Respondent:

William Nichols

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016786

 

Petitioner:

Marianne Lunde

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Eligio Savatore

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016790

 

Petitioner:

Jerad Hioki

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jennifer Hioki

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Corrected Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.   Proof of Service does not show the address at which Respondent was served.

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016791

 

Petitioner:

Bobbi Page

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Sid Page

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016797

 

Petitioner:

Vicki Denny

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Scott Yelenic

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Corrected FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016799

 

Petitioner:

Stephen Finley

Attorney: Megan Sasaki

Respondent:

Lindsey Finley

Attorney: Joseph J. Bell

1.       Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 

2.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016801

 

Petitioner:

Jason Bice

Attorney: William Phillips

Respondent:

Mechan Bice

Attorney: Jennifer Granger

1.      Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 

2.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016803

 

Petitioner:

Brooke Parkhouse

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Caitlin Parkhouse

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner if Respondent does not file Response within time allowed by order of Commissioner LaChance. .  

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016805

 

Petitioner:

Roberta Hondle

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Russell Tullar

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016807

 

Petitioner:

Deborah Senneca-Powell

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Michael Powell

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016808

 

Petitioner:

Nicole Regnier

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Jesse Hanshaw

Attorney: Self-Represented

 1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016821

 

Petitioner:

Cara Rogers

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Thomas Rogers

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016827

 

Petitioner:

Brenda Eccarius

Attorney: Sara Thompson

Respondent:

 

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016834

 

Petitioner:

Bryan Lopin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Brittany Lopin

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016835

 

Petitioner:

Mason Emmett

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Breana Lee

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016837

 

Petitioner:

Devon Folden

Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

Respondent:

William Folden

Attorney: James-Philip Anderson

1.      Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 

2.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016839

 

Petitioner:

Greg Van der Veen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Janet Witharm

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

b.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016849

 

Petitioner:

Schirin Chams-Diba

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Ryan Sijan

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.      The following are still required:

a.      Corrected Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       Once Corrected Proof of Service has been received,

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016853

 

Petitioner:

Desiree Becerra-Brito

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Rafael Brito

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      Corrected Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 

b.      FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.

c.       Once corrected Proof of Service has been received, the Court requires one of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION  05/06/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL21-016857

 

Petitioner:

Lindia Fleek

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

William Fleek

Attorney: Self-Represented

1.      Status Conference is continued to 11/04/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2.       The following are still required:

a.      One of the following:

                                                              i.      FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR

                                                             ii.      Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR

                                                           iii.      FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  

3.      The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 11/04/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

4.      The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

______________________________________________

 

 

April 1, 2022 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference Calendar 

Family Law Status Conference standard order terms. 

The following terms apply to all of the below cases and are incorporated by reference into the Tentative Decision for each case.   Review them carefully.

  1. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 8 or by email to nccounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 04/01/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  2. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 04/01/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. 
  3. Both parties are advised that no Judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  4. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  5. If both parties want to opt out of further status conference, each must notify the Clerk at nccounter@nccourt.net, with a copy to the other party. Unless both parties opt out at least three (3) court days before the status conference date, appearance at the next status conference is required. 
  6. If both parties opt out of the status conference, the orders to serve and file the above documents will be vacated at the time that this opt out is effective.  These documents will still be required before the case can proceed further. The Court can place the case back on the Status Conference calendar and reinstate a filing deadline for these documents on request of either party or by the Court giving notice of a new Status Conference date.
  7. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.    

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 19-014874

 

Petitioner:

Beverly Sample

Attorney: W. Gregory Klein

Respondent:

Ronald Sample

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. This case was filed on 01/09/2019, more than three years ago.  Petitioner’s attorney is advised that the Court intends to dismiss the case pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250 if Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition is not filed on or before April 15, 2022. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 19-015416

 

Petitioner:

Kendra DeOliveira

Attorney: Megan Sasaki (Ltd Scope)

Respondent:

Virgilio DeOliveira

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.  The Court notes that this case was filed on 10/02/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above.  If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    3. Once it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition have been served, the Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 19-015440

 

Petitioner:

Shawna Campbell

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Ehron Phillips

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.  Parties have not complied with the last two Status Conference Orders.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
    2. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
    3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 19-015445

 

Petitioner:

Hailey Johnson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

James Johnson

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Personal appearance is required.  No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time.  Parties have not complied with the last Status Conference Order.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.  (Final Declaration was filed 12/31/2019, but there is no Preliminary Declaration as required by Family Code Section 2104).
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent. (Final Declaration was filed 12/31/2019, but there is no Preliminary Declaration as required by Family Code Section 2104).
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference. __________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-015585

 

Petitioner:

David Braut

Attorney: Laura Strasser

Respondent:

Normaini Braut

Attorney: Chandra Miller

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-015667

 

Petitioner:

Hannah Korn

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Thomas Smith

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-015740

 

Petitioner:

Lisa Krason

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Scott Krason

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-015762

 

Petitioner:

Joel Bright

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Schuyler Bright

Attorney: Megan Sasaki

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-016017

 

Petitioner:

Donald Fagundes

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Stephanie Fagundes

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-016025

 

Petitioner:

Shannon Banks

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Gary Banks

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
    2. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
    3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-016046

 

Petitioner:

Elizabeth Lawson

Attorney: Shawn O'Brien

Respondent:

David Lawson

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-016055

 

Petitioner:

Lucy Ward

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Ari Ratzer

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 20-016075

 

Petitioner:

Gary Reedy

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Katrina Schneider

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
    1. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
    2. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
    3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting. 
  2. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 21-016366

 

Petitioner:

Sandra DeMara

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Robert DeMara

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No.

FL 21-016375

 

Petitioner:

Jennifer Ham

Attorney: Deise Dirks (Ltd Scope)

Respondent:

Hilton Ham

Attorney: Trevor Hensley

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 21-016410

 

Petitioner:

Sarah Childs

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Mark Martinez

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    3. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 21-016690

 

Petitioner:

Tracey Woods

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Cynthia Martin

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 21-016705

 

Petitioner:

Jennifer Krill

Attorney: Jennifer Granger

Respondent:

Cynthia Moya

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL 21-016728

 

Petitioner:

Simone Weit

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Scott Weidert

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016729

 

Petitioner:

Cynthia Ott

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Paul Ott

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016731

 

Petitioner:

Lindsey Eaton

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Gregory Eaton

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of FL-110 Summons and blank FL-120 Response OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.  The Court notes that proof of service indicates that only FL-100 Petition was served.
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    3. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016742

 

Petitioner:

Lana Hilger

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Ronald Hilger

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. The Court notes that Judgment documents have been submitted, but have not yet been processed.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016743

 

Petitioner:

Anai Waznablank

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Rene Medina

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016747

 

Petitioner:

Stuart Beach

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Janet Beach

Attorney: Joseph J. Bell

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016748

 

Petitioner:

Jennifer Melzer

Attorney: Matthew Oliveri

Respondent:

Derrick Melzer

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Judgment documents reflecting the relief requested in the Petition  OR Agreement that parties are working out settlement agreement. The Court notes that default was entered on 11/12/2021.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016754

 

Petitioner:

Joseph Weathers

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Morgan Whitmore

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Judgment documents reflecting the relief requested in the Petition  OR Agreement that parties are working out settlement agreement. The Court notes that default was entered on 03/08/2022.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016757

 

Petitioner:

Krista Conrad

Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

Respondent:

Alan Conrad

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. 
    2. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file.  The Court requires one of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016761

 

Petitioner:

Calvin Keene

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Ashley Mahar

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016764

 

Petitioner:

Bryan McAlister

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Cassandra McAlister

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. The Court notes that Judgment documents have been submitted and the file is in review process. If the Judgment is approved, this hearing will be dropped.
  3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016769

 

Petitioner:

Terri Wolfe

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Peter Wolfe

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016778

 

Petitioner:

Esther Pearcy

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Adam Pearcy

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016779

 

Petitioner:

Heather Lewis

Attorney: Megan Sasaki

Respondent:

Bradley Lewis

Attorney: James-Philip Anderson

  1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. 
  2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016830

 

Petitioner:

Douglas Johnson

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Dianna Johnson

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. One of the following:
      1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
      2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response  OR
      3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.  If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016842

 

Petitioner:

Patty Tims

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Thomas Tims

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

04/01/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No.

FL21-016854

 

Petitioner:

Karyn Packard

Attorney: Nancy Christie

Respondent:

Robert Packard

Attorney: Self-Represented

  1. Status Conference is continued to 10/07/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2.  The following are still required:
    1. Re-submit Judgment documents with Agreement.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/07/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
  4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________


March 4, 2022 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference Calendar 
Image removed.
Family Law Status Conference standard order terms.

The following terms apply to all of the below cases and are incorporated by reference into the Tentative Decision for each case. Review them carefully.
A. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 8 or by email to nccounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 03/04/2022. If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
B. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 03/04/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary UNLESS the order in your case requires that appearance.
C. Both parties are advised that no Judgment has been entered. No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
D. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
E. If both parties want to opt out of further status conference, each must notify the Clerk at nccounter@nccourt.net, with a copy to the other party. Unless both parties opt out at least three (3) court days before the status conference date, appearance at the next status conference is required.
F. If both parties opt out of the status conference, the orders to serve and file the above documents will be vacated at the time that this opt out is effective. These documents will still be required before the case can proceed further. The Court can place the case back on the Status Conference calendar and reinstate a filing deadline for these documents on request of either party or by the Court giving notice of a new Status Conference date.
G. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.
______________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 19-014807
Petitioner: Kelly Ferrante

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Taylor Ferrante
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. The Court notes that this case was filed on 01/09/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above. If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 19-014866
Petitioner: Jessica Battenfeld 
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Christopher Tzalemtzis
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. One of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 19-014867
Petitioner: Shaina West
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Jeramie West
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. The Court notes that this case was filed on 02/04/2019, more than three years before the next status conference date stated above. If Proof of Service of the Summons and Petition has not been filed with the Court before the next status conference date, the case will be dismissed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 583.250.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 19-015197
Petitioner: Dawn Longinotti
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Thomas Longinotti
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. One of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________

03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 19-015495
Petitioner: Charles Williams
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Stephanie Williams
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.

2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

Case No. FL 20-015977
Petitioner: Calvin Crawford
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Jabreia Crawford
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. The Court notes that certified mail service is acceptable on out of state Respondent only if the receipt card has been signed, returned and attached to FL-115. This has not been received.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. One of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
d. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 20-015978
Petitioner: Michael Gibson
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Angela Davis
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 20-015982
Petitioner: Nicole Burkes
Attorney: Marcia Randle

Respondent: Anthony Montanino
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISIONCase No. FL 20-016004
Petitioner: Ashley Duran
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Anthony Duran
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. One of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016254
Petitioner: Melissa Dietrick
Attorney: Greg Klein

Respondent: David Dietrick
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016294
Petitioner: Chameli Ardaugh
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Nicholas Ardaugh
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. One of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016305
Petitioner: Jack Emery
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Date Emery
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016319
Petitioner: Karen Ranger
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Jody Ranger
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
b. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
c. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016323
Petitioner: Cynthia Contreras
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Robert Shipley
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016660
Petitioner: Alexis Ricci
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Jack Ricci
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. One of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016671
Petitioner: Jeremy McReynolds
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Jessica McReynolds
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Corrected OR New Proof of Service of Summons that complies with Code of Civil Procedure. The Court notes that the FL-115 as filed states that the pleadings were mailed, but does not attach FL 117 showing Respondent�s signature. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
c. Once there has been correct service of process, the Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016672
Petitioner: WIlliam Jackson
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Barbara Jackson
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016673
Petitioner: Charles Johnck
Attorney: Candence Gettys

Respondent: Michelle Johnck
Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016682
Petitioner: Crystal Betito
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Paul Betito
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-01683
Petitioner: Edward Abbott
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Lori Abbott
Attorney: Greg Klein

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Petitioner.
b. Local FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire from Respondent.
c. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016685
Petitioner: Rhyannon Von Stockhausen
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Henk Von Stockhausen
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Corrected Proof of Service of Summons for Amended Petition. FL-115 filed on 02/10/2022 does not specify that Amended Petition and Summons on Amended Petition were served. FL-115 also needs correction to state the date and time of service in item 3.a
b. Once corrected FL-115 has been filed, the Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Amended Petition has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016686
Petitioner: Patricial Dewlaney
Attorney: Nancy Christie

Respondent: Dennis Dewlaney
Attorney: James-Phillip Anderson

1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016687
Petitioner: Marty Padilla
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Cinda Padilla
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016689
Petitioner: Crystal Johnson
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Dwayne Johnson
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016693
Petitioner: Matthew Cooper
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Danelle Cooper
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. One of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016694
Petitioner: Tiffany Lujan
Attorney: Candence Gettys

Respondent: Angelo Lujan
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016700
Petitioner: Teresa Thomas
Attorney: Cleat Walters, III

Respondent: Ryan Thomas
Attorney: Sara Thompson

1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016701
Petitioner: Peter Luckerath
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Deyra Fajardo-Luckerath
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016707
Petitioner: Jody Ahlquist-Mough
Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: David Mough
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR Dismissal of case if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
c. There is no Proof of Service of Summons and Petition in the file. The Court requires one of the following:
i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR
ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response OR
iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016709
Petitioner: Kelly Speck
Attorney: Stacey Herhuskey

Respondent: Kurt Speck
Attorney: Laura Strasser (Ltd scope)

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016714
Petitioner: Charles Bicking
Attorney: Candence Gettys

Respondent: Rianna McGee
Attorney: Self-Represented

1. Status Conference is continued to 09/02/2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before the continued date stated above to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
2. The following are still required:
a. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
b. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/02/2022, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________
03/04/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department 3  STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION
Case No. FL 21-016719
Petitioner: Hamilton Bryan
Attorney: Brooke Stephens

Respondent: Julie Bryan
Attorney: Evan Samuelson

1. Both parties are represented by an attorney. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
2. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.
__________________________________________________________________


 

Truckee

Click on any of the links below to view the current tentative rulings in that category, or call (530)  362-4309 (option 9).

Case Management Conferences

July 15, 2022   9:00 am   Dept. A

1. CU20-084918             JONES et al vs. FULL THROTTLE et al

This case was last heard on June 17, 2022, and the case-management conference (“CMC”) was continued to August 19, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department ‘A’.  This CMC is dropped as mis-calendared for this particular date and will next be heard on August 19, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. in Department ‘A’.  To the extent there are any, and with the exception of the August 19th CMC, all other CMC dates are hereby vacated   No appearances required.

 

2. TCU20-7766              PARKER vs. SAMANTHA REEM et al

Appearances are required by all counsel.  Defendant/Cross-Defendant Reem (“Reem”) has still not appeared or filed responsive pleadings in this matter.  Plaintiff’s request to take Reem’s default was denied on or about March 7, 2022, and no subsequent applications for default have been filed since.  Further, Defendants/Cross-Complainants Safeway and Pittore were authorized by the Court on or about April 18, 2022, to serve Reem with their cross-complaint by publication, but the Court notes there is no request for default on file as to Reem and the cross-complaint.  The Court requires a status update from the parties.

 

3. TCU21-7998              BANK OF AMERICA vs. DAVID A GOLDSWORTHY

Appearance is required by Plaintiff’s counsel.  The Court notes that the Defendant was served on or about March 29, 2022, but there is still no answer or default in the Court’s file.

-----------------

This is the Court’s tentative ruling.  In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and thereafter notify the court’s law and motion secretary at (530) 362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing.  If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling.  Any argument is limited to five minutes.  California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Unless the court orders otherwise, the court does not provide court reporters for civil law and motion hearings and case management conferences at the court's expense.  Any litigant who wants a record of a law and motion matter or a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense.  Local Rule 10.00.3B.

You may appear via VIDEO by arranging such ZOOM appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: TRCOUNTER@NCCOURT.NET      

 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

08/10/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department B

Case No.

TFL 20-7642

 

Petitioner:

Tynaia Kirkpatrick

Attorney:  Self-Represented

Respondent:

Sean Kirkpatrick

Attorney: Self-Represented    

  1.  This is the third scheduled Status Conference.  Personal appearance is required.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. Corrected FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Filed document does not show method or date of service.
    2. Either FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner OR agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response.  If there is a settlement agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. Both parties are advised that no judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  4. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  5. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.   

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

08/10/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department B

Case No.

TFL 21-7805

 

Petitioner:

Katrina Rodarte-Nunez

Attorney:  Self-epresented

Respondent:

Rogelio Nunez-Zepeda

Attorney: Self-Represented   

  1. This is the third scheduled Status Conference.  Personal appearance is required.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner,
    2. Either FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner OR agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response.  If there is a settlement agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. Both parties are advised that no judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  4. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  5. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment. 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

08/10/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department B

Case No.

TFL 21-7858

 

Petitioner:

Mary Hyatt

Attorney: Rachel Crus

Respondent:

Kurt Hyatt

Attorney: Self-Represented   

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/08/2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department B of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Truckee Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before 02/08/2023  to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner,
    2. Either FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner OR agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response.  If there is a settlement agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/08/2023.
  4. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 9 or by email to trcounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 08/10/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  5. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 08/10/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. 
  6. Both parties are advised that no judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  7. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  8. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment. 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

08/10/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department B

Case No.

TFL 21-7922

 

Petitioner:

Tracie Connors

Attorney: Mary Jones

Respondent:

Jeffrey Connors

Attorney:  Eve Gravell

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/08/2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department B of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Truckee Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before 02/08/2023  to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/08/2023.
  4. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 9 or by email to trcounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 08/10/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  5. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 08/10/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. 
  6. Both parties are advised that no judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  7. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  8. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment. 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

08/10/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department B

Case No.

TFL 21-7923

 

Petitioner:

Meredith Walker

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Thomas Walker

Attorney: Self-Represented   

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/08/2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department B of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Truckee Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before 02/08/2023  to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. Either FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner OR agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response.  If there is a settlement agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/08/2023.
  4. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 9 or by email to trcounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 08/10/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  5. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 08/10/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. 
  6. Both parties are advised that no judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  7. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  8. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment. 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

08/10/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department B

Case No.

TFL 22-8028

 

Petitioner:

Jesse Smith

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Samantha Smith

Attorney: Self-Represented   

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/08/2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department B of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Truckee Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before 02/08/2023  to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner,
    2. Either FL-120 Response and FL-141 from Respondent, OR FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner OR agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response.  If there is a settlement agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.   
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/08/2023.
  4. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 9 or by email to trcounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 08/10/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  5. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 08/10/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. 
  6. Both parties are advised that no judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  7. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  8. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment. 

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

08/10/2022, 9:00 a.m. Department B

Case No.

TFL 22-8034

 

Petitioner:

Leslie Sanchez

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent:

Salvador Herrera Machuca

Attorney: Self-Represented    

  1. Status Conference is continued to 02/08/2023 at 9:00 a.m. in Department B of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Truckee Branch.   Please check the Court website tentative ruling page two (2) court days before 02/08/2023  to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary.
  2. The following are still required:
    1. Proof of Service of Summons IF the parties seek to terminate marital status before December 22, 2022. 
    2. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner,
    3. FL-141 Declaration Re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
  3. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 02/08/2023.
  4. If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 9 or by email to trcounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date of 08/10/2022.  If neither party gives this notice, the Tentative Decision will be adopted as the Order of the Court.
  5. If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on 08/10/2022 at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. 
  6. Both parties are advised that no judgment has been entered.  No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
  7. If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 4. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
  8. Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment. 

  9. </