DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
FL0002219·nevada·Civil·Status Conference
Hearing 9 months agoPersonal appearance is required.

Castro, Kayla v. Castro, Louis

Status Conference

Hearing date
Dec 5, 2025
Department
3
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PetitionerCastro, Kayla
RespondentCastro, Louis

Ruling

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION 12/05/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002219 Petitioner: Castro, Kayla Attorney: Self-Represented Respondent: Castro, Louis Attorney: Self-Represented

1. This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

2. The Court notes that the following are still required: a. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. b. Corrected FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons. The form used by Petitioner does not include all the required forms, including FL-100 Petition, FL-110 Summons, FL-105 Uniform Child Custody Declaration, blank FL-120 Response and blank FL-105 Uniform Child Custody Declaration. If the original server is not available to correct this, the documents will need to be re-served.

When the Court has the correct Proof of Service, the Court requires one of the following: i. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR ii. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR iii. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served.

If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.

3. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

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