Marriage of P.G. and S.S. CA6

Filed 5/5/25 Marriage of P.G. and S.S. CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re the Marriage of P.G. and S.S. H050797 (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 19FL003925)

P.G.,

Appellant,

v.

S.S.,

Respondent.

PUBLIC—REDACTED VERSION OF OPINION* Appellant P.G. (Father) appeals from the trial court’s orders (1) denying his request for a domestic violence restraining order pursuant to the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (DVPA, Fam. Code, § 6200, et seq.) against respondent S.S. (Mother), and his request for sole physical and legal custody of their minor child, A.R.; and (2) granting Mother’s request for sole physical and legal custody of A.R. with no contact

This case involves material from a sealed record. In accordance with the *

California Rules of Court, rules 8.46(g)(1) and (2), we have prepared both public (redacted) and sealed (unredacted) versions of this opinion. We order the unredacted version of this opinion sealed.

allowed between Father and A.R.1 Father contends the trial court erred by finding Mother credible despite contrary evidence, failing to make certain orders, discounting his expert witness, considering improper testimony from Mother’s expert, and allowing the child’s therapist to testify without granting Father access to the therapist’s records. Mother has not appeared in this appeal.2 For the reasons stated below, we will affirm the trial court’s order denying Father’s request for a domestic violence restraining order, and will reverse and remand the trial court’s custody and visitation order. [The trial court sealed the underlying proceedings at issue on this appeal. Although blanket sealing orders are disfavored (In re Marriage of Nicholas (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1566, 1575), given the circumstances of this case which involve serious allegations regarding a minor child, we will not disturb the order. Accordingly, except for the disposition, the remainder of this public version of this opinion has been redacted.]