RYAN HAYNES V. SONYA LOSSIUS
Request for Order (RFO) to modify custody/visitation
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 May 7, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
16. RYAN HAYNES V. SONYA LOSSIUS PFL20210153
Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) on March 26, 2026, seeking modification of child custody and parenting plan orders. The parties were not referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) as they had participated in CCRC within the prior six months. Proof of Service shows Petitioner was served by mail and electronically on March 26, 2026.
On April 14, 2026, the court in Department 8 referred the parties to CCRC with an appointment on April 27, 2026. The court ordered the CCRC report to be prepared on an expedited basis. However, a further review hearing was set in the event the report was not able to be prepared in a timely manner.
The court finds that the CCRC report was not able to be prepared in time for the hearing. As such, the court finds good cause to continue the review hearing to June 18, 2026 at 1:30 PM in Department 5. Any supplemental declarations are due at least 10 days prior to the hearing.
TENTATIVE RULING #16: THE COURT FINDS GOOD CAUSE TO CONTINUE THE REVIEW HEARING TO JUNE 18, 2026 AT 1:30 PM IN DEPARTMENT 5. ANY SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATIONS ARE DUE AT LEAST 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING.
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
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.