Request for Order (RFO)
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 April 16, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
19. JESSICA RUBALCAVA V. ISAIAH RUBALCAVA 24FL0018
Petitioner filed a Request for Order (RFO) on February 18, 2026, requesting spousal support as well as modification of the Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DVRO). Petitioner filed an Income and Expense Declaration on February 13, 2026. There is no Proof of Service showing Respondent was properly served.
Respondent filed a Responsive Declaration on April 2, 2026. Proof of Service shows Petitioner was served electronically on April 6, 2026. Respondent asserts he was not properly served.
The court drops the matter from calendar due to the lack of proper service.
All prior orders remain in full force and effect.
TENTATIVE RULING #19: THE MATTER IS DROPPED FROM CALENDAR DUE TO THE LACK OF PROPER SERVICE. ALL PRIOR ORDERS REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT.
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.
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?”