| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
Clarification of custody orders
8. JESSICA ROBBINS V. RESTYN ROBBINS 21FL0115
On January 9, 2026, Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking orders regarding shared expenses by the parties. All required documents were mail served on January 15th.
Petitioner has not filed a Responsive Declaration to Request for Order. Where a party fails to timely file opposition papers the court, in its discretion, may treat said failure “as an admission that the motion or other application is meritorious.” El Dorado County, Local Rule 7.10.02(C). Here, it appears the RFO was timely and properly served on Petitioner. She had notice of the pending requests and chose not to oppose them. As such, the court finds good cause to treat her failure to do so as an admission that the claims made in the RFO are meritorious.
Respondent is requesting clarification of the existing custody orders which she states currently result in recurring disputes regarding extracurricular activities, shared expenses, transportation, medical care, communication, and grandparent trips. Attachment A to the RFO contains the proposed orders Respondent asks the court to adopt.
The court is adopting the proposed orders as stated in Exhibit A to the RFO with the exception of the following. The court is not adopting Section D – Grandparent Trips. Each party may arrange for the minors to visit their grandparents on his or her custodial time. The court is not adopting Section F – Uninsured Medical, Dental and Mental Health Expenses. Instead, the parties are ordered to follow the procedures set forth in the attached FL-192 for all childcare and healthcare cost reimbursements.
Respondent is directed to prepare the Findings and Orders After Hearing (FOAH). 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 #8: THE COURT IS ADOPTING THE PROPOSED ORDERS AS STATED IN EXHIBIT A TO THE RFO WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE FOLLOWING. THE COURT IS NOT ADOPTING SECTION D – GRANDPARENT TRIPS. EACH PARTY MAY ARRANGE FOR THE MINORS TO VISIT THEIR GRANDPARENTS ON HIS OR HER CUSTODIAL TIME. THE COURT IS NOT ADOPTING SECTION F – UNINSURED MEDICAL, DENTAL AND MENTAL HEALTH EXPENSES. INSTEAD, THE PARTIES ARE ORDERED TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN THE ATTACHED FL-192 FOR ALL CHILDCARE AND HEALTHCARE COST REIMBURSEMENTS.
RESPONDENT IS DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE FINDINGS AND ORDERS AFTER HEARING (FOAH). THIS ORDER IS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UPON THE COURT’S
ADOPTION OF THE TENTATIVE RULING AND IS NOT CONDITIONED ON THE PREPARATION OF THE FOAH.
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 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.