Request for Order - Visitation
This matter is set for hearing on Respondent/Mother’s 3/23/2026 Request for Order (“RFO”) to modify child custody/visitation with respect to the parties’ son, Ashton (DOB 10/3/2023). Mother requests unsupervised day visits twice a week for up to four hours per visit, and she would like to take Ashton to her home in Walnut Creek, so he can visit with her parents, with whom Mother lives. Mother has completed a 16-week batterers’ intervention course and three months of therapy. On 4/29/2026 Petitioner/Father filed a Responsive Declaration in which he proposes unsupervised daytime visits with Mother twice a week for up to three hours per visit in a public location in Marin County.
The parties were referred to Family Court Services (“FCS”). Both parties were interviewed by FCS, and FCS filed its Report & Recommendations with the Court on 5/15/2026. On 6/1/2026 Mother filed a Declaration and on 6/6/2026, Mother filed a Statement of Agreement/ Disagreement with the FCS Recommendations, which included the 4/4/2026 final supervised visitation report by Winfrid Rogers and the 5/22/2026 final supervised visitation report by Linda Cuculich, and addressing the allegations made by Father to FCS. Mother modified her request for visitation based on the fact that she works full-time for Citibank on Wednesdays and Saturdays for visits either Every Wednesday from 5:00 to 7:00 pm or alternatively Saturdays from 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm and every Sunday for six hours.
After considering each of the parties’ written submissions, as well as the FCS Report & Recommendations, and Mother’s Statement of Disagreement with the FCS Recommendations, the Court finds that it is in the best interests of Ashton to adopt the FCS Recommendations, as modified below. Therefore, the Court orders as follows:
1. All prior orders not in conflict with the below shall remain in effect with the following modifications.
2. Mother’s visits with Ashton shall transition to unsupervised day visits twice a week for up to four hours per visit. Unless parents agree otherwise, the visits shall be every Sunday from 10:00 am to 2:00 pm and every Wednesday from 3:00 to 7:00. Visits shall continue to remain in Marin County for four months. If there have been no issues with these visits and Mother has been consistent with the visits, the visits may occur at Mother’s home.
3. After six months of unsupervised four-hour visits twice a week, Mother’s visits shall expand to six-hour day visits twice a week.
4. Ashton shall not be left in the unsupervised care of his maternal grandparents. Mother shall always be present when Ashton is visiting in her home.
5. There shall be no corporal punishment of Ashton including “thumping”, hitting, etc. by anyone providing care for him.
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. Ashton’s nap and feeding schedule shall be maintained during Mother’s visits.
7. Mother shall have an age-appropriate car seat for Ashton.
8. Until he reaches the age at which he is water-safe, Ashton shall be properly supervised at all times when around bodies of water including the swimming pool at the home of the maternal grandparents.
9. Mother and her family members shall not attempt to follow Father on social media or access his social media accounts. Father shall report violations of this provision to law enforcement.
10. Father shall not post on social media any content denigrating Mother.
SO ORDERED.
The Court will prepare the order per Rule 5.125, CA Rules of Court.
Any party who disagrees with the Court's tentative ruling and wishes to have oral argument must notify the Court at (415) 444-7046 and opposing counsel (or if the opposing party is selfrepresented, notice must be given directly to the opposing party) of their intent to appear at the hearing for oral argument by 4:00 pm on the court day before the hearing, as required by Marin County Superior Court Family Law Local Rules 7.12(B) and (C). Notice may be given by telephone or in person. Absent proper notice, no oral argument will be permitted. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling will become the order of the Court.
Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, persons who requested oral argument must appear for the hearing in person or remotely via Zoom, in accordance with the Court website guidelines. If appearing remotely via Zoom (video or telephone), you are responsible for ensuring you have adequate connectivity; the Court may proceed in a party’s absence if technical issues arise. Proper Zoom etiquette and courtroom decorum are required, and failure to comply may result in the hearing being halted and an order to appear in person being made.