CODY BRIDENBAKER V. JENNA PERYAM

LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 July 2, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.

10. CODY BRIDENBAKER V. JENNA PERYAM PFL20160174

Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) on April 15, 2026, seeking modification of the child custody and parenting plan orders. The parties were referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) with an appointment on May 15, 2026, and a review hearing on July 2, 2026. Petitioner was served on April 16, 2026. There is no Proof of Service showing that the Department of Child Support Services, who is a party to the case, was properly served.

Both parties attended CCRC and were able to reach agreements. A report with the parties’ agreements, as well as further recommendations was filed with the court on May 20, 2026. Copies were mailed to the parties on May 26th.

Petitioner has not filed a Responsive Declaration.

The court finds good cause to proceed on the merits, despite the lack of proper service to the Department of Child Support Services. The court finds the agreements and recommendations as set forth in the May 20th CCRC report to be in the best interest of the minor. The court adopts the agreements and recommendations as set forth.

All prior orders not in conflict with these orders remain in full force and effect. Respondent is directed to prepare the Findings and Orders After Hearing (FOAH); however, this order is effective immediately upon the court’s adoption of the tentative ruling and is not conditioned on the preparation of the FOAH.

TENTATIVE RULING #10: THE COURT FINDS GOOD CAUSE TO PROCEED ON THE MERITS, DESPITE THE LACK OF PROPER SERVICE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES. THE COURT FINDS THE AGREEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE MAY 20TH CCRC REPORT TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE MINOR. THE COURT ADOPTS THE AGREEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AS SET FORTH.

ALL PRIOR ORDERS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH THESE ORDERS REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT. RESPONDENT IS DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE FINDINGS AND ORDERS AFTER HEARING (FOAH); HOWEVER, THIS ORDER IS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UPON THE COURT’S ADOPTION OF THE TENTATIVE RULING AND IS NOT CONDITIONED ON THE PREPARATION OF THE FOAH.

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.