DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
22FL0121·eldorado·Civil·Contempt
Hearing 5 months agoDROPPED FROM CALENDAR

Angelica Moffitt v. James Moffitt

Order to Show Cause (OSC) for contempt

Hearing date
Apr 2, 2026
Department
5
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Ruling

LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 April 2, 2026 8:30 AM/1:30 PM

14. ANGELICA MOFFITT V. JAMES MOFFITT 22FL0121

Respondent filed an Order to Show Cause and Affidavit for Contempt (OSC) on November 21, 2025. Petitioner was personally served on January 5, 2026. The Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) was not served.

Respondent appeared for the hearing on February 5, 2026, however, Petitioner failed to appear. The court continued the matter to allow Respondent additional time to perfect service. The court directed Respondent to reserve Petitioner with all the documents, including a copy of the court’s minute order from the February 5th hearing.

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

The matter is dropped from calendar due to the lack of proper service.

All prior orders remain in full force and effect.

TENTATIVE RULING #14: THE MATTER IS DROPPED FROM CALENDAR DUE TO THE LACK OF PROPER SERVICE. 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.

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