Request for Order (RFO) for child custody, parenting plan, child support, and spousal support
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DEPARTMENT 5 April 23, 2026 8:30 AM/1:30 PM
19. JESSICA SEABOLD V. SHAUN SEABOLD 26FL0081
Petitioner filed a Request for Order (RFO) seeking child custody and parenting plan orders, as well as child and spousal support orders, on January 29, 2026. Petitioner concurrently filed an Income and Expense Declaration. The parties were referred to Child Custody Recommending Counseling (CCRC) with an appointment on February 25, 2026 and a review hearing on April 23, 2026. Proof of Service shows Respondent was personally served with the necessary documents, excluding the Income and Expense Declaration and blank FL-150 as well as the referral to CCRC.
Both parties appeared at CCRC and reached a full agreement. Parties submitted a stipulation to the court, which the court adopted as its order on February 26, 2026. The court finds the parties’ stipulation continued to be in the best interests of the minors, and therefore, maintains those orders in full force and effect. The court finds this portion of the RFO to be moot and as such, drops it from calendar.
The court drops Petitioner’s request for child and spousal support from calendar due to the failure to properly serve Respondent with the Income and Expense Declaration.
All prior orders not in conflict with this order remain in full force and effect.
TENTATIVE RULING #19: THE COURT DROPS THE CHILD CUSTODY AND PARENTING PLAN PORTION OF THE RFO FROM CALENDAR AS MOOT. THE COURT MAINTAINS THE CURRENT ORDERS AS TO CUSTODY AND PARENTING TIME. THE COURT DROPS PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR CHILD AND SPOUSAL SUPPORT FROM CALENDAR DUE TO THE FAILURE TO PROPERLY SERVE RESPONDENT WITH THE INCOME AND EXPENSE DECLARATION. ALL PRIOR ORDERS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDER 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?”