Review Hearing
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 May 28, 2026 8:30 AM/1:30 PM
18. KATRINA NEILSEN V. MORGAN HOLLIS 24FL0907
On March 19, 2026, parties appeared for the hearing on Petitioner’s Request for Order (RFO). The court adopted its tentative ruling and set the matter for trial and a review hearing. The court ordered Petitioner to participate in an Evidence Code section 730 evaluation. The court directed that supplemental declarations be filed and served at lease 10 days prior to the May 28th review hearing.
Respondent filed a supplemental declaration on May 18, 2026. It was served on Petitioner on May 17, 2026. Respondent requests the current orders remain in full force and effect.
The court has not received a supplemental declaration from Petitioner, although Respondent references it in his declaration.
The court finds the current orders remain in the minor’s best interest. The court notes parties are pending an evidentiary hearing on August 3, 2026, at 8:30 AM in Department 5.
All prior orders remain in full force and effect.
TENTATIVE RULING #18: 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.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”