DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25FL0677·eldorado·Civil·Family Law
Hearing 5 months agoDropped from calendar (moot).

ANNIE R. ADAMS V. CHARLES D. MEINTZ

Request for Order (RFO)

Hearing date
Mar 26, 2026
Department
5
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

PlaintiffANNIE R. ADAMS
DefendantCHARLES D. MEINTZ

Ruling

LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 March 26, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.

14. ANNIE R. ADAMS V. CHARLES D. MEINTZ 25FL0677

On October 14, 2025, Petitioner filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking spousal support and a variety of other orders. She filed her Income and Expense Declaration concurrently therewith. All required documents were served on October 17th.

A Judgment was entered on March 20, 2026. The court finds the RFO to be moot and as such, drops the matter from calendar.

TENTATIVE RULING #14: THE RFO IS MOOT AND AS SUCH, DROPPED FROM CALENDAR.

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.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations 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?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share