Request for Order (RFO) seeking custody and visitation orders
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 May 21, 2026 8:30 AM/1:30 PM
1. JASON GILLESPIE V. BARBARA GILLESPIE 24FL0722
On February 20, 2026, Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking custody and visitation orders and school orders for the children. All required documents were served on February 24th.
Respondent filed and served a Responsive Declaration to Request for Order on March 26th, though it is unclear why as she is the one who filed the moving papers. There was an RFO lodged with the court by Petitioner on February 23rd however, according to the court’s file that RFO was not filed and it is therefore, not pending before the court.
Petitioner has not filed a Responsive Declaration to Request for Order.
Only Respondent appeared at the Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) appointment on March 27th, therefore a report without recommendations was prepared and filed with the court.
The parties filed a request to be re-referred to CCRC which was granted and a new appointment was set for April 14th. Both parties attended the rescheduled CCRC appointment, however the CCRC counselor was once again unable to make any recommendations as Respondent refused to allow the children to speak with CCRC.
On May 12th, Respondent filed and served Respondent’s Reply Declaration to CCRC Report.
After reviewing the filings, the court finds it necessary for CCRC to interview the children prior to making any changes in custody or visitation. The parties are re-referred to CCRC with an appointment on Tuesday, June 16th at 1:00 PM. The parties are ordered to make the children available to speak with the CCRC counselor. Neither party shall interfere with the counselor’s interview of the children nor attempt to coach the children for their interview. Failure to abide by this order may result in sanctions. A review hearing is set to join with the already scheduled court trial on July 14, 2026. Parties are to include any supplemental information in their Statement of Issues and Contentions which is to be filed prior to trial in accordance with local rules.
TENTATIVE RULING #1: THE PARTIES ARE RE-REFERRED TO CCRC WITH AN APPOINTMENT ON TUESDAY JUNE 16TH AT 1:00 PM. THE PARTIES ARE ORDERED TO MAKE THE CHILDREN AVAILABLE TO SPEAK WITH THE CCRC COUNSELOR. NEITHER PARTY SHALL INTERFERE WITH THE COUNSELOR’S INTERVIEW OF THE CHILDREN NOR ATTEMPT TO COACH THE CHILDREN FOR THEIR INTERVIEW. FAILURE TO ABIDE
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 May 21, 2026 8:30 AM/1:30 PM
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?”
BY THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS. A REVIEW HEARING IS SET TO JOIN WITH THE ALREADY SCHEDULED COURT TRIAL ON JULY 14, 2026. PARTIES ARE TO INCLUDE ANY SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION IN THEIR STATEMENT OF ISSUES AND CONTENTIONS WHICH IS TO BE FILED PRIOR TO TRIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL RULES.
NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD UNLESS A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR 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.