Teixeira v. Borello CA3

Filed 9/20/24 Teixeira v. Borello CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (El Dorado) ----

GABRIEL TEIXEIRA, C098610

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 22FL0769)

v.

CATARINA BORELLO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Plaintiff Gabriel Teixeira filed a petition to determine parentage (petition) in El Dorado County where his former girlfriend defendant Catarina Borello had lived before moving out of state with the parties’ child. As part of the proceedings related to the petition, Borello obtained a domestic violence restraining order. Believing El Dorado County lacked jurisdiction to hear Teixeira’s petition, the trial court denied the petition and vacated the domestic violence restraining order. Borello appeals, arguing the trial court erred by finding it lacked jurisdiction. Borello further raises various procedural claims aimed at reversing the trial court’s order.

1

Teixeira, representing himself in propria persona, did not file a brief on appeal. We agree with Borello that the trial court had jurisdiction to hear the petition under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (Act) (Fam. Code,1 § 3400 et seq.) and thus it also had jurisdiction to hear the request for a domestic violence restraining order made during that proceeding. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order denying the petition and vacating the domestic violence restraining order. Given this result, we do not need to address Borello’s remaining procedural claims. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On August 18, 2022, Teixeira filed the petition to determine his parental relationship to a four-month-old child he had with Borello. In the petition, Teixeira declared that Borello lived in California. In a declaration of jurisdiction filed with the petition, Teixeira declared the child lived with Borello in El Dorado County from birth until the filing of the petition. On November 8, 2022, Borello filed a request for a domestic violence restraining order. In a text message submitted with Borello’s request for a restraining order and in an accompanying request for child custody, Borello indicated that she and the child had not lived in California since the beginning of August. On December 2, 2022, the court issued an order restraining Teixeira from abusing or contacting Borello. In the order, Teixeira’s address was listed as being in Quincy, which is located in Plumas County. On March 2, 2023, the trial court continued a hearing due to inclement weather. In an accompanying tentative ruling, the trial court indicated it had “concerns regarding El Dorado County being the proper jurisdiction for this matter.” Specifically, the court cited to documents filed in the case, which provided Borello lived out of state, Teixeira