ANDREW AULT V. SHAINA AULT
Request for Order (RFO)
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 May 7, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
1. ANDREW AULT V. SHAINA AULT 25FL0137
On February 9, 2026, Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking visitation orders. The parties were referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) with an appointment on March 12, 2026, and a review hearing was set for the present date. The RFO was served on February 24th along with a document identified as “mediation questionnaire.” There is no Proof of Service for the CCRC referral, the Notice of Tentative Ruling and the blank FL-320.
Despite the defect in service, Petitioner filed and served his Responsive Declaration to Request for Order on March 5, 2026.
The parties attended CCRC as scheduled and were able to reach some agreements. A report containing those agreements, along with additional recommendations, was prepared on April 20, 2026. It was mailed to the parties on April 21st.
Respondent filed her RFO but failed to make any requests therein. The court is proceeding with the RFO on the merits despite Respondent’s failure to fully complete the RFO only because the parties both appeared at and participated in CCRC. That said, Respondent is admonished that if she files another blank RFO in the future it will be dropped from calendar.
After reviewing the CCRC report, the court finds the agreements and recommendations contained therein to be in the best interests of the minor. They are hereby adopted as the orders of the court.
Respondent 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 #1: THE AGREEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATINOS CONTAINED IN THE APRIL 20, 2026 CCRC REPORT ARE FOUND TO BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE MINOR AND ARE HEREBY ADOPTED AS THE ORDERS OF THE COURT.
RESPONDENT 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.
Cited authorities
Extracted by Gemini Flash from the ruling text. Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Ask about this ruling
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Powered by Gemini Flash Lite. Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.