Soukhaseum v. Gido CA2/1

Filed 12/29/25 Soukhaseum v. Gido CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

SENG SOUKHASEUM, B344563

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Nos. 24STRO05008, v. 24STFL07845)

YVONNE GIDO,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Anne Kiley, Judge. Affirmed. Seng Soukhaseum, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. No appearance for Defendant and Respondent.

_______________________________________

We resolve this case by a memorandum opinion pursuant to California Standards of Judicial Administration, standard 8.1. Seng Soukhaseum appeals from an order in which the trial court: (1) granted respondent Yvonne Gido’s request for a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) against Soukhaseum, and (2) denied Soukhaseum’s request for a DVRO against Gido. In an unpublished opinion, we affirmed the grant of a restraining order against Soukhaseum. (Soukhaseum v. Gido (Nov. 24, 2025, B343581) [nonpub. opn.].) In the instant appeal, Soukhaseum challenges the ruling denying her requested DVRO.1 The court held a combined hearing on the two requests in November 2024. Soukhaseum and Gido both testified that, over the preceding two years of their marriage, they fought frequently, and their fights typically became physically violent. Each claimed the other was the aggressor. Each claimed the other was emotionally abusive and controlling. The parties also offered conflicting versions of a July 7, 2024 incident that resulted in Gido obtaining an emergency restraining order against Soukhaseum. No other witnesses testified.