DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
FDV-25-818613·sf·FamilyLaw·Contempt
Hearing 4 months agoCONTINUED

Alena Calder v. Ludwig C. Calder

Order to Show Cause and Affidavit for Contempt

Hearing date
May 5, 2026
Department
403
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$1,050$1,110$600$5,000$17,220

Parties

PlaintiffAlena Calder
RespondentLudwig C. Calder

Ruling

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

5) 6 ALENA CALDER,) Case Number: FDV-25-818613) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: May 5, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 LUDWIG C. CALDER,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CONTEMPT 13 TENTATIVE RULING 14 The parties are ordered to appear. The parties may appear in person in Dept. 403 or remotely by 15 Zoom video. If a party chooses to appear by video, that party must abide by the Notice and 16 Instructions for Remote Appearances in San Francisco Family Court set forth above. 17 1) The parties are Petitioner Alena Calder (Mother) and Respondent Ludwig C.

Calder (Father). 18 2) On 2/18/26, Mother filed an Order to Show Cause and Affidavit for Contempt alleging that 19 Father violated Court orders issued 12/3/25 by suspending Mother’s supervised visitations and 20 9/2/25 by denying Mother access to the children’s medical records. 21 3) On 2/27/26, Mother filed a Proof of Personal Service indicating the Order to Show Cause and 22 Affidavit for Contempt filed 2/18/26 was personally served on Father on 2/26/26. 23 4) On 4/28/26, Father filed an Income and Expense Declaration indicating he earns an average 24 monthly salary of $1,050, receives $1,110 in monthly public assistance, earns $600 in monthly 25 self-employment income, has $5,000 in personal property assets, and pays $17,220 in average 26 monthly expenses. 27 5) The parties are ordered to appear.

Father shall be prepared to inform the Court whether he 28 would like the Court to appoint contempt counsel to represent him in this contempt action. If 29 Father would like contempt counsel appointed to him, the Court will set a future hearing date for

1 Father’s arraignment. If Father does not want contempt counsel to be appointed to him, the Court 2 will arraign Father at the 5/5/26 hearing and set a future trial date. 3

7

11

15

19

23

27

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