DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
FL 1205763·marin·FamilyLaw·Contempt
This matter is set for arraignment on Petitioner/Mother’s 4/6/2026 Order to Show Cause re Contempt.

Jamie Dominguez v. Raul Alfredo Dominguez Torres

Order to Show Cause re Contempt

Hearing date
May 15, 2026
Department
E
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Other

Parties

PetitionerJamie Dominguez
RespondentRaul Alfredo Dominguez Torres

Ruling

This matter is set for arraignment on Petitioner/Mother’s 4/6/2026 Order to Show Cause re Contempt.

Respondent/Father filed a Responsive Declaration on 4/30/2025 in which he states he does not have the ability to pay the amount owed. Father also filed an Income & Expense Declaration and lodged his 2024 and 2025 income tax returns with the Court. Appearances required.

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 self- represented, 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.

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