DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26PR00764·sonoma·Probate·Guardianship
Hearing todayCONTINUED

Guardianship of Ximena Rose Castro

Appointment of Guardian

Hearing date
Aug 18, 2026
Department
61
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Oct 6, 2026
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Ruling

APPEARANCES ARE NOT REQUIRED. Absent objection, the Petition for Guardianship is GRANTED and the Court will sign the proposed order submitted by Petitioner(s). The Court finds good cause to waive and does waive further investigation if any is required under Prob. Code § 1513. Absent objection, the Request for Special Immigrant Juvenile Findings is GRANTED and the Court will sign the proposed order submitted by Petitioner. As the proposed ward will attain the age of 21 on October 11, 2026, and the guardianship will terminate by operation of law, the case is SET back on calendar October 20, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 61 to address the termination of the guardianship.

No appearances will be required. Further advisements which are not part of tentative ruling: If any objections are filed at or before the time of hearing, the Court will not adopt the tentative ruling and will, instead, set the matter for a contested hearing and the parties will be notified by the Court as to when they should next appear.

10. Guardianship of Tushar Grak 26PR00747 Appointment of Guardian

TENTATIVE RULING:

APPEARANCES ARE NOT REQUIRED. Absent objection, the Petition for Guardianship is GRANTED and the Court will sign the proposed order submitted by Petitioner(s). The Court finds good cause to waive and does waive further investigation if any is required under Prob. Code § 1513. Absent objection, the Request for Special Immigrant Juvenile Findings is GRANTED and the Court will sign the proposed order submitted by Petitioner. As the proposed ward will attain the age of 21 on November 29, 2026, and the guardianship will terminate by operation of law, the case is SET back on calendar December 1, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 61 to address the termination of the guardianship.

No appearances will be required. Further advisements which are not part of tentative ruling: If any objections are filed at or before the time of hearing, the Court will not adopt the tentative ruling and will, instead, set the matter for a contested hearing and the parties will be notified by the Court as to when they should next appear.

11. Guardianship of Ximena Rose Castro 26PR00764 Appointment of Guardian

TENTATIVE RULING:

APPEARANCES ARE NOT REQUIRED. The matter is continued to October 6, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 61 to permit the proposed guardian an opportunity to review the comments and recommendations made in the Memorandum of Court Investigator filed July 24, 2026, and determine how best to proceed in light of the particular circumstances of the guardianship petition.

12. Guardianship of Avisail Olin Sanchez-Garcia 26PR00877 Review of Guardianship

TENTATIVE RULING:

APPEARANCES ARE NOT REQUIRED. Absent objection, the provisions of the temporary guardianship will remain in effect until the Court has made a ruling on the underlying general guardianship petition. The case remains as SET for hearing on the general guardianship petition on October 6, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 61.

13. Guardianship of Tyler Vincent Mellone, Thea Lilly Mellone SPR090713 Termination of Guardianship

TENTATIVE RULING:

APPEARANCES ARE REQUIRED. The Court, having filed an order appointing attorney Carolyn Vandyk as Minor’s Counsel, orders the appearance of Ms. Vandyk and the parties for confirmation of the appointment, and to set a case management schedule, to include dates for the filing of a memo by Minor’s Counsel outlining the issues and position of the minors, as well as dates for a contested hearing if necessary and the attendant witness list and document exchange deadlines.

***End of Tentative Rulings***

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