Review hearing – Child Custody/Visitation
This matter is on calendar for a review hearing following a referral to Marin Family Court Services (FCS) for mediation, counseling and recommendations. Haley Burns (Mother) and Christopher Labrado (Father) were both interviewed. The parties share a son, Carter (DOB 4-23- 2025).
Carter lives with Mother in Fairfax, although both are currently residing in Los Angeles with Mother’s family. Father currently lives in Forestville.
There were no orders until a 3-year restraining order was put in place on May 4, 2026, under which both Mother and Carter are protected persons. The restraining order has an expiration date of May 4, 2026. Haley has sole legal and physical custody of Carter and no visits were ordered for Father, pending FCS and the scheduled hearing on June 11, 2026.
FCS submitted a detailed report dated June 4, 2026. Neither parent filed a statement of agreement/disagreement.
The interviews with FCS were fruitful. Both parents clearly love Carter very much. Carter is young and vulnerable, and he needs to be physically and emotionally safe in the care of both of his parents. FCS observed that more information is needed about Chris’ substance use and mental health, as well as recommendations for the best way forward to address these issues.
The Court has reviewed the submissions of the parties, the FCS report and finds good cause and that it is in the best interest of the child to adopt the recommendations from FCS as modified as follows:
All current orders shall remain in effect with the following additions/modifications:
Timeshare
1. Carter shall continue to live primarily with Haley and shall have professionally supervised visits with Chris one time each month for up to three hours each visit. Visits shall be supervised at an agency or by a private professional agreed upon by both parents and shall take place at an agreed upon location within 30 minutes of where Haley is living.
2. If Haley travels to the Bay Area with Carter, she shall offer Chris a professionally supervised visit at an agreed location in the Bay Area.
Collateral Issues
3. Chris shall have an evaluation that addresses his mental health and substance use and shall follow any recommendations made by evaluator.
4. Chris shall refrain from using marijuana or any other drugs at least 24 hours prior to any visits with Carter.
5. The parents shall engage in peaceful contact only in the presence of Carter.
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?”
6. Neither parent shall make any disparaging comments about the other parent in the presence of Carter or allow others to do so.
As authorized by CRC Rule 5.125, the Court shall prepare the findings and order after hearing.
Parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 7.12(B), (C), which provide that if a party wants to present oral argument, the party must contact the Court at (415) 444-7046 and all opposing parties by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the scheduled hearing. Notice may be by telephone or in person to all other parties that argument is being requested (i.e., it is not necessary to speak with counsel or parties directly.) Unless the Court and all parties have been notified of a request to present oral argument, no oral argument will be permitted except by order of the Court. In the event no party requests oral argument in accordance with Rule 7.12(C), the tentative ruling shall become the order of the court.
IT IS ORDERED that evidentiary hearings shall be in-person in Department B. For routine appearances, the parties may access Department B for video conference via a link on the court website. Litigants in the virtual courtroom are required to leave the video screen on and wait for your case to be called.
FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are responsible for ensuring that they have a good connection and that they are available for the hearing. If the connection is inadequate, the Court may proceed with the hearing in the party’s absence.