Arcadia Farber v. Meir Sror

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MARIN

DATE: 6/4/26 TIME: 9:00 A.M. DEPT: B CASE NO: FL0002405

PRESIDING: HON. JAMES M. SCHURZ

REPORTER: CLERK: A. URTON

PETITIONER: ARCADIA FARBER

and

RESPONDENT: MEIR SROR

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ORDER – SET ASIDE/ VACATE DEFAULT; CASE PROGRESS CONFERENCE

RULING

Meir Sror (Father) filed a Request for Order seeking to vacate entry of default, vacate any default judgment that may have been entered, and requesting sanctions against Arcadia Farber (Mother). The request was filed May 1, 2026.

The Court has reviewed the papers submitted by the parties and prior orders of this Court. The Court finds good cause and orders as follows:

1. The default entered on April 20, 2026, is vacated. The default was entered erroneously.

2. The Court clarifies that no default Judgment was entered.

3. Father’s request for sanctions is denied.

Counsel for Father is directed to prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing.

Parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 7.12(B), (C), which provide that if a party wants to present oral argument, the party must contact the Court at (415) 444-7046 and all opposing parties by 4:00 p.m. the court day preceding the scheduled hearing. Notice may be by telephone or in person to all other parties that argument is being requested (i.e., it is not necessary to speak with counsel or parties directly.) Unless the Court and all parties have been notified of a request to present oral argument, no oral argument will be permitted except by order of the Court. In the event no party requests oral argument in accordance with Rule 7.12(C), the tentative ruling shall become the order of the court.

IT IS ORDERED that evidentiary hearings shall be in-person in Department B. For routine appearances, the parties may access Department B for video conference via a link on the court website. Litigants in the virtual courtroom are required to leave the video screen on and wait for your case to be called.

FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are responsible for ensuring that they have a good connection and that they are available for the hearing. If the connection is inadequate, the Court may proceed with the hearing in the party’s absence.