Request for Order for custody, visitation, and child support
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 July 9, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
3. BRITINI JOHNSON V. PATRICK JOHNSON 23FL1116
On April 17, 2026, Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking custody and visitation orders and child support orders. There is no Proof of Service for the RFO or any of the other required documents, nevertheless, Petitioner filed and served her Responsive Declaration to Request for Order on May 6th thereby waiving any potential objection to service.
The parties attended Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) on May 15, 2026. They reached some agreements but could not agree on all issues therefore, a report with agreements and recommendations was prepared on May 18, 2026. It was mailed to the parties on May 19th.
Petitioner filed her Income and Expense Declaration on June 3, 2026. It was served the same day.
On June 23rd, Respondent filed another Income and Expense Declaration and a declaration. There is no Proof of Service for either document.
Also on June 23rd, Petitioner filed and served Petitioner’s Objection to Respondent’s Reply Declaration and Respondent’s [sic] Reply Declaration to CCRC Report Dated 5/18/2026.
Because Petitioner filed an objection to Respondent’s June 23rd declaration but did not raise the issue of service, the court finds that she has actual knowledge of the declaration and any such objection to service has been waived therefore, the court is considering the declaration to the extent Petitioner’s objections have not been sustained. The same does not go for Respondent’s Income and Expense Declaration. There is no indication that Petitioner was ever served with that document therefore the court cannot consider it.
Petitioner’s objections are sustained in their entirety. The court is considering only the admissible portions of the first five pages of Respondent’s reply declaration.
On June 30th, Respondent filed a Reply Declaration of Patrick Johnson in Support of Request for Order. It was served by mail on June 29th.
Respondent asks to change the parenting schedule in accordance the proposed schedule in his declaration. He asks that the holiday schedule and all other custody orders remain the same. He further requests modification of child support based on the updated
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 July 9, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
schedule and the parties’ current income. He asks that the court set support to guideline or adopt his proposed step-up support schedule. He further asks that he be obligated to pay only 50% toward one mutually agreed upon extracurricular activity per child. Finally, he asks that he be given a credit or reimbursement for overpayment of support.
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?”
Petitioner asks the court to deny Respondent’s request to modify the parenting plan and order guideline child support based on the actual parenting time exercised. She further asks that the court order the parties to communicate on Talking Parents only and clarify that the parties are not required to share the email account pbjohnson0913@gmail.com. She asks that the account be assigned to Respondent or deleted in its entirety.
The court has read and considered the filings as outlined above. The court adopts the agreements and recommendations set forth in the May 18, 2026 CCRC report with one small modification regarding the exchange locations. The Exchange Location section on page 8 shall be amended to read as follows: For any non-school exchanges at the beginning of Respondent’s parenting time, drop off shall occur at Herbert Green Middle School (address 3781 Diamond Rd., Placerville, CA 95667); at the beginning of Petitioner’s parenting time, drop off shall occur at the Camino Post Office (address 4129 Carson Rd., Camino, CA 95709).”
The request to modify support is denied due to Respondent’s failure to properly serve a current Income and Expense Declaration with supporting documents.
Petitioner is directed to prepare the Findings and Orders After Hearing (FOAH); however, 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 #3: PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS ARE SUSTAINED IN THEIR ENTIRETY. THE COURT IS CONSIDERING ONLY THE ADMISSIBLE PORTIONS OF THE FIRST FIVE PAGES OF RESPONDENT’S REPLY DECLARATION.
THE COURT DOES NOT FIND A CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A CHANGE IN THE CUSTODY AND VISITATION ORDERS AS STATED IN THE JUDGMENT. THE COURT IS ADOPTING THE AGREEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SET FORTH IN THE MAY 18, 2026 CCRC REPORT WITH ONE SMALL MODIFICATION REGARDING THE EXCHANGE LOCATIONS. THE EXCHANGE LOCATION SECTION ON PAGE 8 SHALL BE AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: FOR ANY NON-SCHOOL EXCHANGES AT THE BEGINNING OF RESPONDENT’S PARENTING TIME, DROP OFF
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 July 9, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.
SHALL OCCUR AT HERBERT GREEN MIDDLE SCHOOL (ADDRESS 3781 DIAMOND RD., PLACERVILLE, CA 95667); AT THE BEGINNING OF PETITIONER’S PARENTING TIME, DROP OFF SHALL OCCUR AT THE CAMINO POST OFFICE (ADDRESS 4129 CARSON RD., CAMINO, CA 95709).”
THE REQUEST TO MODIFY SUPPORT IS DENIED DUE TO RESPONDENT’S FAILURE TO PROPERLY SERVE A CURRENT INCOME AND EXPENSE DECLARATION WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS.
PETITIONER IS DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE FINDINGS AND ORDERS AFTER HEARING (FOAH); HOWEVER, THIS ORDER IS EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UPON THE COURT’S ADOPTION OF THE TENTATIVE RULING AND IS NOT CONDITIONED ON THE PREPARATION OF THE FOAH.
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.