Corey Derounce Royal-Million v. Tony John Royal-Million

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

5) 6 COREY DEROUNCE ROYAL-MILLION,) Case Number: FDI-24-800431) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: September 8, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 TONY JOHN ROYAL-MILLION,) Department: 404) 10 Respondent) Presiding: AI MORI) 11) 12 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CONTEMPT 13 TENTATIVE RULING 14 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 15 Court makes the following findings and orders: 16 A. Procedural History 17 1) The parties in this matter are Corey Royal-Million (Petitioner) and Tony Royal-Million 18 (Respondent).

The parties married on 10/22/2017. Petitioner contends the parties separated on 19 6/26/2023, for a marriage of 5 years and 8 months. Respondent asserts the parties separated on 20 1/22/2019, for a marriage of 1 year and 3 months. The parties have no minor children in common. 21 Both parties are self-represented. 22 2) On 1/22/2019, a Criminal Protective Order was issued for Respondent’s protection against 23 Petitioner. The CPO expired on 1/22/2022. 24 3) On 7/29/2021, a 3-Year Restraining Order After Hearing was entered for Petitioner’s protection 25 against Respondent in related Case No.

FDV-21-815745. It expired on 7/28/2024. 26 4) On 11/21/2025, a 5-Year Restraining Order After Hearing was entered for Respondent’s 27 protection against Petitioner in related Case No. FDV-17-813401. It is set to expire on 28 11/21/2030. 29

1 5) Now on for hearing is Petitioner’s Order to Show Cause and Affidavit for Contempt filed 2 7/7/2026. Petitioner alleges the following: 3 a. Respondent violated the restraining order filed on 7/29/2021 which required Respondent 4 to attend a 52 week batterers’ intervention program. 5 b. Respondent violated the restraining order filed on 7/29/2021 by emptying a storage unit 6 in his name and discontinuing payments on the jointly used storage unit (leading to the 7 unit being auctioned). 8 c. In July 2022, Respondent took community or separate property belonging to Petitioner 9 including an electric scooter, wallet, identification cards, bank cards, and tumi satchel. 10 d.

Respondent mismanaged financial accounts during the marriage. 11 e. Respondent refused to provide emotional support when Petitioner’s grandparents passed 12 away in May 2022 and refused to provide financial assistance for Petitioner to fly to 13 Texas to attend his grandparents’ funerals. 14 f. Respondent used community resources for personal benefit while refusing to contribute 15 to Petitioner’s basic necessities during marriage. 16 Petitioner requests: 17 a. Value of property lost due to storage-unit auction. 18 b.

Lien fees, penalties, and administrative charges. 19 c. Replacement value of stolen property. 20 d. Loss of cash and personal effects taken by Respondent. 21 e. Reimbursement claims arising from undisclosed accounts and misappropriated funds. 22 f. Tax exposure from unreported assets and account activity. 23 g. Legal fees required to pursue enforcement and contempt motions. 24 6) Per the Proof of Service filed 8/24/2026, Petitioner’s Order to Show Cause was personally served 25 on Respondent on 8/21/2026. 26 7) On 8/26/2026, Respondent filed a Responsive Declaration.

Respondent asks the Court to dismiss 27 the contempt charges on the following grounds. In the alternative, Respondent asks the Court to 28 appoint legal counsel to represent Respondent. Respondent states: 29 a. Petitioner does not set forth proper individual counts.

1 b. The only identifiable year mentioned is 2022 and California contempt actions are subject 2 to a two-year statute of limitations. 3 c. Petitioner improperly filed this contempt action in the FDI matter rather than in Case No. 4 FDV-21-815745. 5 d. Respondent was not served with the July 2021 restraining order until 4/3/2024, and by 6 that time no storage units existed. 7 e. The July 2021 restraining order permits Respondent to engage in individual therapy as an 8 alternative to a 52-week batterer intervention program.

Respondent states he completed 9 52 weeks of individual therapy. 10 B. Findings and Order 11 1) The Court finds good cause to dismiss Petitioner’s 7/7/2026 Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt 12 in its entirety because: (a) Petitioner failed to succinctly and separately plead each count, (b) 13 Petitioner did not explain which orders Respondent violated with respect to most of Petitioner’s 14 allegations, (c) many of Petitioner’s allegations are not the appropriate subject for contempt 15 charges, and (d) the allegations of contempt which occurred in 2022 are time-barred under Code 16 of Civil Procedure section 1218.5(b), which states that the statute of limitations for commencing a 17 contempt action to enforce an order under the Family Code (that is not a child or spousal support 18 order) is two years from the time the alleged contempt occurred. 19 2) Petitioner’s request for legal fees to pursue his 7/7/2026 Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt is 20 denied. 21 3) Petitioner’s requests for orders related to “value of property lost due to storage-unit auction; lien 22 fees, penalties, and administrative charges; replacement value of stolen property; loss of cash and 23 personal effects taken by Respondent; reimbursement claims arising from undisclosed accounts 24 and misappropriated funds; and tax exposure from unreported assets and account activity” are 25 denied without prejudice and may be addressed at trial. 26 4) The Court will prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing. 27

29