HAIDAR VS HAIDAR

Petitioner's Request for Order re Compel Disclosure, etc.-- HEARING REQUIRED. Based on Respondent's Responsive Declaration, it appears the subject pension plan may no longer exist and Respondent proposed an offer to compensate Petitioner for the loss of the interest awarded to her in the parties' Judgment.

Accordingly, the parties are directed to meet and confer on Respondent's offer in good faith and the Court will entertain any stipulations or, absent agreement, hear argument and testimony about the Court's ruling.

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge J. Richard Distaso in Department #13: THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Sarah Birmingham in Department #14: THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.

The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Maria Elena Ramos-Ratliff in Department #25: FL-22-001443 - HAIDAR VS HAIDAR Petitioner's Request for Order re Attorney's Fees, etc.-- HEARING REQUIRED.

There is no proof of service on file and Respondent has not filed a Responsive Declaration. (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.94(b).)

While the Court notes there is an attached document purporting to be an "audit trail" from "Dropbox Sign," this does not alleviate Petitioner from complying with the proof of service requirement under the Rules of Court and it is unclear whether the fees and costs request is need-based or conduct-based.

If the former, then it is not eligible for tentative ruling and a hearing is required. If the latter, then the statutory basis for the request is not cited and the standards and findings required for a conduct-based award differ depending on the governing law.

For instance, fees and costs awarded in the nature of a sanction pursuant to Family Code section 271 require the Court to make findings that the amount not impose "an unreasonable financial burden" on the sanctioned party and Respondent does not have a current Income and Expense Declaration on file.

Given the rescheduled and pending Informal Discovery Conference, and the fact that an Order Shortening Time was not requested, absent appearance and waiver of any notice or service objections, the Court is inclined to deny the request without prejudice or to continue the hearing and reserve jurisdiction.