Request for Order (RFO) seeking spousal support, attorney’s fees, and fiduciary sanctions
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 July 2, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
3. HOPE KINSMAN V. JEREMY KINSMAN 25FL0256
On April 9, 2026, Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking attorney’s fees and costs. It does not appear that this RFO was served, however on June 9, 2026 he filed an amended RFO seeking spousal support, attorney’s fees and “fiduciary sanctions.” He attached a previously filed Income and Expense Declaration dated March 2nd, but he did not file an updated Income and Expense Declaration. The amended RFO was served on June 9th along with an FL-150, though it is unclear if the FL-150 that was served was a blank one or an updated one. Additionally, the Notice of Tentative Ruling was not served.
Petitioner filed and served her Responsive Declaration to Request for Order and her Income and Expense Declaration on June 17th.
Respondent filed a reply declaration and his Income and Expense Declaration on June 23rd.
“For all hearings involving child, spousal, or domestic partner support, both parties must complete, file, and serve a current Income and Expense Declaration.” Cal. Rule Ct. 5.260(1); See also Cal. Fam. Code §2100. “’Current’ means the form has been completed within the past three months providing no facts have changed.” Cal. Rule Ct. 5.260(3). The party requesting support shall file and serve their Income and Expense Declaration with the initial moving papers. El Dorado Sup. Ct. Rule 8.03.01.
In addition to the court’s need for an Income and Expense Declaration to make support orders, it is also needed for the court to rule on a request for attorney’s fees as the court is to make findings on “whether there is a disparity in access to funds to retain counsel, and whether one party is able to pay for legal representation of both parties.” Fam. Code § 2030(a)(2).
This matter is dropped from calendar due to Respondent’s failure to timely file the requisite Income and Expense Declaration and due to his failure to serve the required Notice of Tentative ruling.
TENTATIVE RULING #3: THIS MATTER IS DROPPED FROM CALENDAR DUE TO RESPONDENT’S FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE THE REQUISITE INCOME AND EXPENSE DECLARATION AND DUE TO HIS FAILURE TO SERVE THE REQUIRED NOTICE OF TENTATIVE RULING.
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?”
NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD UNLESS A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 July 2, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
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.