Keith Richardson v. Lachon Richardson

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED FAMILY COURT

KEITH RICHARDSON, Petitioner VS. LACHON RICHARDSON, Respondent ) )

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case Number: FDI-20-794120 Hearing Date: May 14, 2026 Hearing Time: 9:00 AM Department: 403 Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA

REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: ISSUE WRIT OF EXECUTION TENTATIVE RULING Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the Court makes the following findings and orders: A. Procedural History 1) The parties are Petitioner Keith Richardson and Respondent Lachon Richardson. 2) On 2/28/25, the Court entered judgment, which includes a provision for Petitioner to pay Respondent $160,000 total in $3,500 monthly payments due on the 1st of each month until the balance is paid in full. This provision is contingent on Petitioner’s accounting documents showing that business earnings from Keith’s Chicken and Waffles were no greater than 5% above $100,000 annually for 2023, and Petitioner was to provide the accounting paperwork within 30 days. 3) On 12/17/25, Petitioner filed a Request for Order seeking to set aside judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 473 and Family Code section 2122. Petitioner asserts that he lacks the ability to comply with the payment terms of the judgment because his income is generated from a small business with limited liquid funds. Petitioner further asserts the Court relied on false information when entering judgment because Respondent represented that she has a $3,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 monthly rent obligation despite living with her parents rent free. Petitioner states the motion is based on, “actual fraud, perjury, failure to disclose material facts, and attorney abandonment.” 4) On 2/23/26, Respondent filed a Motion to Strike Petitioner’s Request for Order pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 436. Respondent’s request is based on a lack of supporting documents and sufficient facts and lack of proper service under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010 and California Rules of Court, rule 5.92(b)(1). Attached to Respondent’s Motion to Strike are the documents with which Respondent was served, and Petitioner’s supportive declaration (which was filed with the Court) is not attached. 5) At the prior 3/3/26 hearing, the Court made a finding of good cause to continue the hearing to 7/7/26 at 9 AM in Dept. 403 for proper service to be effectuated and ordered as follows: a. The Court declines to exercise its discretion under Code of Civil Procedure section 436; Respondent’s Motion to Strike is therefore DENIED. b. At least 16 Court days prior to the next hearing date, Petitioner shall reserve on Respondent the 12/17/25 Request for Order and supportive declaration using a service method authorized by the Code of Civil Procedure and then file form FL-335 (Proof of Service) with the Court confirming service was effectuated. c. At least 9 Court days prior to the next hearing date, Respondent may file a Responsive Declaration. d. At least 5 Court days prior to the next hearing date, Petitioner may file and serve a Reply Declaration. 6) On 3/3/26, Respondent filed a Request for Order seeking a Writ of Execution. Respondent requests the Court issue Writ of Execution to permit collection on the judgment entered 2/28/25. Respondent attached a proposed Writ of Execution as Exhibit A to the Request for Order, which indicates the total amount due is $190,155.07. 7) On 3/12/26, Respondent filed a Proof of Service by First-Class Mail – Civil indicating that the Request for Order and supportive pleadings were served on Petitioner on 3/12/26. B. Findings and Order 1) The Court finds good cause to continue Respondent’s 3/3/26 Request for Order (seeking a Writ of Execution to permit collection on the judgment entered 2/28/25) to 7/7/26 at 9 AM in

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Dept. 403 to be heard on the same date as Petitioner’s 12/17/25 Request for Order (seeking to set aside the judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 473 and Family Code section 2122). 2) Counsel for Respondent shall prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing. 3) Preparation of Order: If you are directed by the court to prepare the order after hearing – within 10 calendar days of the hearing you must either: (a) Serve the proposed order to the other party/counsel for approval, and follow the procedures set forth in CA Rules of Court, Rule 5.125(c), or (b) If the other party did not appear or the matter was uncontested, submit the proposed order after hearing directly to the court. Failure to submit the order after hearing within 10 days may allow the other party to prepare a proposed order and submit it to the court in accordance with CA Rules of Court, Rule 5.125(d).