Request for Order (RFO) for emergency custody
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 June 25, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
12. NICOLE MORTON V. DYLAN MORTON 25FL0366
Petitioner filed an ex parte request for emergency custody orders on March 23, 2026. On March 24th, the court denied the request. Petitioner filed a Request for Order (RFO) on March 24, 2026, seeking the same orders requested in the ex parte application. The parties were referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) with an appointment on April 23, 2026 and a review hearing on June 25, 2026. Upon review of the court file, there is no Proof of Service showing Respondent was properly served.
Neither party appeared at the CCRC appointment.
The court drops the matter from calendar due to the lack of proper service as well as Petitioner’s failure to appear at CCRC which was set at her request.
All prior orders remain in full force and effect.
TENTATIVE RULING #12: THE COURT DROPS THE MATTER FROM CALENDAR DUE TO THE LACK OF PROPER SERVICE AS WELL AS PETITIONER’S FAILURE TO APPEAR AT CCRC WHICH WAS SET AT HER REQUEST. ALL PRIOR ORDERS REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT.
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?”