DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25FL0877·eldorado·Civil·Child Custody and Visitation
Hearing todayCCRC report recommendations adopted.

ROSS SCROGGINS V. RANDY SCROGGINS

Request for Order (RFO)

Hearing date
Aug 20, 2026
Department
5
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffRoss Scroggins
RespondentRandy Scroggins

Ruling

LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 August 20, 2026 8:30 AM/1:30 PM

7. ROSS SCROGGINS V. RANDY SCROGGINS 25FL0877

On February 27, 2026, Petitioner filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking custody and visitation orders. The RFO was originally filed ex parte. The ex parte request was granted and the parties were referred to an emergency set Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) appointment. A hearing was set for the present date. All required documents were served on March 10, 2026.

The parties attended CCRC on March 27, 2026 and were unable to reach any agreements. As such, a report with recommendations was prepared and mailed to the parties on May 13, 2026.

Petitioner filed a declaration on May 27th. There is no Proof of Service of this document therefore the court has not read or considered it.

Respondent has not filed a Responsive Declaration to Request for Order.

Petitioner is requesting sole legal and sole physical custody of the minor.

After reviewing the filings as outlined above, the court finds the recommendations contained in the May 13, 2026 CCRC report to be in the best interests of the minor and they are hereby adopted as the orders of the court.

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 #7: THE COURT FINDS THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE MAY 13, 2026 CCRC REPORT TO BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE MINOR AND THEY ARE HEREBY ADOPTED AS THE ORDERS OF THE COURT.

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

LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 August 20, 2026 8:30 AM/1:30 PM

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