DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
FDI-20-793674·sf·FamilyLaw·Attorney Fees and Costs; Elisor Appointment
Hearing 9 days agoCONTINUED

Gil Tamari v. Liron Noiman

Request for Order: Attorney Fees and Costs; Appoint the Clerk of the Court as Elisor

Hearing date
Aug 13, 2026
Department
403
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Oct 13, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Attorney Fees rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$7,674.01

Parties

PetitionerGil Tamari
RespondentLlron Noiman

Ruling

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 4

5) 6 GIL TAMARI,) Case Number: FDI-20-793674) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: August 13, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 LIRON NOIMAN,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER: ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS, APPOINT THE CLERK OF THE COURT 13 AS ELISOR TO SIGN THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT IN ORDER 14 TO ENFORCE THE ORDERS OF THE COURT AND OST 15 TENTATIVE RULING 16 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 17 Court makes the following findings and orders: 18 A.

Procedural History 19 1) The parties are Petitioner Gil Tamari and Respondent Llron Noiman. 20 2) On 6/18/26, Petitioner filed an ex parte Request for Order seeking: (a) appointment of the clerk of 21 court as elisor to execute documents necessary to divide retirement assets pursuant to a Judgment 22 entered 6/15/21; and (b) attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Family Code section 271. 23 3) On 6/18/26, Petitioner filed a Memorandum of Points and Authorities. 24 4) On 6/18/26, counsel for Petitioner filed a declaration substantiating her request for $7,674.01 in 25 Family Code section 271 attorney’s fees. 26 5) On 6/18/26, Petitioner filed an Income and Expense Declaration. 27 6) On 6/18/26, the Court denied Petitioner’s request for emergency relief pending hearing set for 28 8/13/26.

The Court ordered Petitioner to personally serve Respondent with all documents filed 29 with the Request for Order (see FL-300).

1 7) There is no Proof of Service on file indicating Respondent was personally served. 2 8) Respondent did not file a Responsive Declaration. 3 B. Findings and Order 4 1) This matter is CONTINUED to 10/13/26 at 9:00 AM in Dept. 403 to permit Petitioner to 5 effectuate proper service. 6 2) At least 16 Court days prior to the next hearing date, Petitioner shall serve on Respondent the (a) 7 Request for Order and supportive pleadings, (b) Continuance Order contained herein, and (c) 8 Tentative Ruling Instructions using a service method authorized by the Code of Civil Procedure. 9 3) At least 9 Court days prior to the next hearing date, Respondent may file and serve a Responsive 10 Declaration. 11 4) At least 5 Court days prior to the next hearing date, Petitioner may file and serve a Reply 12 Declaration. 13 5) The Court will prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing. 14

18

22

26

29

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