Request for Order (RFO) re: child custody and parenting plan
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 May 28, 2026 8:30 AM/1:30 PM
15. DCSS V. ANTWON LILES (OTHER PARENT: CASSANDRA THORP) PFS20170306
Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) on February 24, 2026, seeking modification of the current child custody and parenting plan orders. The parties were referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) with an appointment on April 2, 2026, and a review hearing on May 28, 2026. Proof of Service shows Other Parent was served at an address in Cameron Park. The address verification shows the verified address in El Dorado. There is no Proof of Service showing DCSS was served.
Neither party appeared for CCRC.
Neither Petitioner nor Other Parent have filed a responsive declaration.
The court drops the matter from calendar due to the lack of proper service as well as Respondent’s failure to appear at CCRC.
TENTATIVE RULING #15: THE COURT DROPS THE MATTER FROM CALENDAR DUE TO THE LACK OF PROPER SERVICE AS WELL AS RESPONDENT’S FAILURE TO APPEAR AT CCRC.
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.
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?”