BAMFORD, ET AL. VS. BURNEY WATER DISTRICT

CASE NUMBER: 24CV-0204809 Tentative Ruling on Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions: On My 7, 2026, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions (OSC) to Guardians ad Litem Artensia Eaton and Lavon Bamford. The OSC was mailed directly to each Guardian ad Litem. The basis for the OSC is that both Guardians ad Litem failed to communicate

with counsel. As to Artensia Eaton, the OSC is DISCHARGED as a Petition for Compromise of Claim of Minor was filed on May 22, 2026. The Court notes that this matter was filed on April 17, 2024. The Court further notes that Plaintiff’s counsel has moved to be relieved as to Lavon Bamford on three separate occasions based on lack of communication with counsel. Each motion was accompanied by a declaration that was compliant with CCP 2015.5. The Court finds that Lavon Bamford has failed to cooperate in this matter, which has affected her effectiveness as the Guardian ad Litem for her minor children. An appearance by Lavon Bamford is necessary on today’s calendar. Absent an appearance, the Court intends to impose sanctions in the amount of $250 and issue an Order to Show Cause Re: Termination of Lavon Bamford’s status as a Guardian ad Litem.

Tentative Ruling on Petition to Approve Minor’s Compromise: This Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim for Minor is a settlement of minor Roman Eaton Harris’ claims from 2023 against the Burney Water District. The minor’s Guardian, Artensia Eaton, was appointed as the minor’s Guardian ad Litem on July 9, 2025. The Court notes this is not an expedited petition brought on Judicial Council Form MC-350EX. See CRC Rule 7.950.5. Hearing is thus needed on the Petition before it can be approved. California Rule of Court, Rule 7.950 states that a petition for court approval of a minor’s compromise must contain a full disclosure of all information that has any bearing upon the reasonableness of the compromise.

The Petition lacks necessary information. The dollar amounts are missing from Item 11.b.(5). Item 12 was left completely blank, however, in Item 7, Petitioner indicated that the minor was evaluated by a healthcare provider. If there were any medical expenses that require reimbursement, they must be listed. Additionally, Item 12.b.(4) must be completed. This information is required in order to move forward with the Petition.

If counsel is able to provide this information at the hearing, the Court can accept oral testimony from either counsel or Petitioner as to this information then allow voir dire of Petitioner as to the terms of the settlement and whether the Petitioner understands that once approved, the settlement is final and binding on the minor. If satisfied, the Court intends to grant the Petition. If granted, the Court will execute the Orders and schedule a hearing for review regarding confirmation of deposit. If counsel is unable to provide this information, counsel is ordered to appear to set a new hearing date.