Davis v. Nuss
Order to Show Cause and Affidavit for Contempt
Motion type
Causes of action
Parties
Ruling
1. Ms. Crandell shall file and serve an FL-150 Income and Expense Declaration and the FL-157 Spousal or Domestic Partner Support Declaration Attachment. This is to be done by June 13, 2022.
2. The Court continues the matter to June 20, 2022, at 10:00 a.m.
3. It is the Court’s tentative position that any decrease in support will be made effective June 1, 2022.
Davis v. Nuss (Case No. 0189131)
On April 28, 2022, Ms. Davis filed for emergency orders regarding custody and visitation. The allegations suggest that Mr. Nuss caused physical injury to their minor child, which was reported to CPS. Orders were issued on April 28, 2022, stopping visitation between the minor child and Mr. Nuss. Mr. Nuss was expected to the minor child’s therapist.
Mr. Nuss has filed a response to the request for order. He contends Ms. Davis is fabricating events to prevent Mr. Nuss from having access to their child. He contends the CPS reporting, the alleged failure to administer antibiotics and others are “blatantly false”. A hearing has been set for June 7, 2022, to address the issues of custody and visitation, but the Court has concerns with that hearing proceeding forward now that there exists an outstanding allegation of contempt involving the same issue of visitation.
On April 28, 2022, Mr. Nuss filed an Order to Show Cause and Affidavit for Contempt. He alleges that Ms. Davis has knowingly refused to follow the court’s order pertaining to visitation. He lists three incidents of contempt. The matter will be heard on June 6, 2022. At that time, Ms. Davis will be arraigned and a future hearing date will be set on the contempt allegations. The parties should be prepared to address how the contempt filing could impact the June 7, 2022, hearing date, if at all. Specifically, the Court would like the parties to address whether the contempt issues be made part of the request for order on June 7, 2022.
///
///
2
Cited authorities
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.