DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
25FL1142·eldorado·Civil·Child Custody
DENIED

BROHEM MONTES DE OCA V. LINDA MEDINA

Request for Order (RFO) for custody

Hearing date
May 7, 2026
Department
5
Judge
Prevailing
Respondent

Motion type

Petition

Parties

PlaintiffBrohem Montes De Oca
RespondentLinda Medina

Ruling

LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 May 7, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.

17. BROHEM MONTES DE OCA V. LINDA MEDINA 25FL1142

Petitioner filed a Request for Order (RFO) on February 9, 2026, requesting child custody and parenting plan orders. The parties were referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) with an appointment on March 13, 2026, and a review hearing on May 7, 2026. Upon review of the court file, there is no Proof of Service showing Respondent was properly served.

Only Respondent appeared at the CCRC appointment. As such, a single parent report was filed with the court on March 13, 2026. Copies were mailed to the parties on March 16th.

The court denies Petitioner’s request for modification due to his failure to appear at the CCRC appointment.

All prior orders 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 #17: THE COURT DENIES PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION DUE TO HIS FAILURE TO APPEAR AT THE CCRC APPOINTMENT. ALL PRIOR ORDERS 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.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…

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.

Source

Share