DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
PFL20060639·eldorado·Civil·Spousal Support
Hearing 19 days agoDENIED (dropped from calendar)

Becky Sutton v. Donald Sutton

Request for Order (modification of spousal support)

Hearing date
Jul 30, 2026
Department
5
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffBecky Sutton
RespondentDonald Sutton

Ruling

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

16. BECKY SUTTON V. DONALD SUTTON PFL20060639

Respondent filed a Request for Order (RFO) on May 13, 2026, seeking modification of the permanent spousal support orders. Respondent concurrently filed an Income and Expense Declaration.

Upon review of the court file, there is no Proof of Service showing Petitioner was properly served.

The court drops the matter from calendar due to the lack of proper service.

TENTATIVE RULING #16: THE MATTER IS DROPPED FROM CALENDAR DUE TO THE LACK OF PROPER SERVICE.

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