Eli Brunius v. Stephanie Milhomme

LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 July 23, 2026 8:30 a.m./1:30 p.m.

2. ELI BRUNIUS V. STEPHANIE MILHOMME 24FL0607

On April 21, 2026, Petitioner filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking custody and visitation orders as well as child support orders. He filed his Income and Expense Declaration concurrently therewith. There is no Proof of Service for either document.

The parties were referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) with an appointment on May 28, 2026, however neither party appeared at the scheduled appointment.

The Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) filed their Responsive Declaration to Request for Order on June 5, 2026. DCSS filed another Responsive Declaration to Request for Order on July 10th, which seems to be a duplicate of their first Responsive Declaration.

On July 13, 2026, Respondent filed an Objection to Petitioner’s Request for Order and Request to Strike. Respondent objects to the RFO and asks that it be stricken from the record as it was not served on her until July 2nd. The same goes for the referral to CCRC.

Respondent’s objection is sustained. This matter is dropped from calendar due to lack of proper service.

TENTATIVE RULING #2: RESPONDENT’S OBJECTION IS SUSTAINED. THIS MATTER IS DROPPED FROM CALENDAR DUE TO 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.