Request for Order (RFO); Ex parte application for emergency custody
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 March 26, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
20. ANGELA WILLIAMS V. JOSEPH IBARRA PFL20150187
Petitioner filed a Request for Order (RFO) on December 29, 2025, seeking modification of the child custody and parenting plan orders. The parties were referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) with an appointment on January 26, 2026, and a review hearing on March 26, 2026. Proof of Service shows Respondent was personally served on January 1, 2026.
Petitioner filed an ex parte application for emergency custody orders on January 6, 2026. The court denied the request on January 7, 2026 and confirmed the previously set CCRC appointment and review hearing.
Both parties attended CCRC and were unable to reach any agreements. A report with recommendations was filed with the court on March 9, 2026. Copies were mailed to the parties on March 10th.
Respondent has not filed a Responsive Declaration.
The court has read and considered the filings as outlined above. The court finds the recommendations set forth in the CCRC report to be in the best interest of the minor, except for the parenting plan. The court finds a week on/week off schedule to be in the best interest of the minor, as it will limit the number of exchanges required. The court is ordering a week on/week off schedule to begin on Monday March 30th with Respondent to drop the minor off at school. Petitioner will then have parenting time until Monday April 6th drop off at school, which will begin Respondent’s parenting time. The schedule will continue to rotate with the exchanges to occur on Mondays. The court adopts the exchange location as set forth in the report for non-school day exchanges. The court adopts the remaining recommendations as set forth in the March 9th CCRC report.
All prior orders not in conflict with this order remain in full force and effect. Petitioner is directed to prepare the Findings and Orders After Hearing (FOAH), however this order is effective immediately upon the court’s adoption of the tentative ruling and is not conditioned on the preparation of the FOAH.
TENTATIVE RULING #20: THE COURT FINDS THE RECOMMENDATIONS SET FORTH IN THE CCRC REPORT TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE MINOR, EXCEPT FOR THE PARENTING PLAN. THE COURT FINDS A WEEK ON/WEEK OFF SCHEDULE TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE MINOR, AS IT WILL LIMIT THE NUMBER OF EXCHANGES REQUIRED. THE COURT IS ORDERING A WEEK ON/WEEK OFF SCHEDULE TO BEGIN ON
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 March 26, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
MONDAY MARCH 30TH WITH RESPONDENT TO DROP THE MINOR OFF AT SCHOOL. PETITIONER WILL THEN HAVE PARENTING TIME UNTIL MONDAY APRIL 6TH DROP OFF AT SCHOOL, WHICH WILL BEGIN RESPONDENT’S PARENTING TIME. THE SCHEDULE WILL CONTINUE TO ROTATE WITH THE EXCHANGES TO OCCUR ON MONDAYS. THE COURT ADOPTS THE EXCHANGE LOCATION AS SET FORTH IN THE REPORT FOR NON- SCHOOL DAY EXCHANGES. THE COURT ADOPTS THE REMAINING RECOMMENDATIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE MARCH 9TH CCRC REPORT. ALL PRIOR ORDERS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDER REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT. PETITIONER IS DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE FINDINGS AND ORDERS AFTER HEARING (FOAH), HOWEVER, THIS ORDER IS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UPON THE COURT’S ADOPTION OF THE TENTATIVE RULING AND IS NOT CONDITIONED ON THE PREPARATION OF THE FOAH.
NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD UNLESS A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR BY PHONE CALL TO THE COURT AT (530) 621-6725 BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; LOCAL RULE 8.05.07; SEE ALSO LEWIS V. SUPERIOR COURT, 19 CAL.4TH 1232, 1247 (1999). NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT AND THE GROUNDS UPON WHICH ARGUMENT IS BEING REQUESTED MUST BE MADE BY PHONE CALL OR IN PERSON BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; LOCAL RULE 8.05.07.