Tentative Rulings

Nevada City

Click on any of the links below to view the current tentative rulings in that category, or call (530) 362-4309.

Court’s tentative rulings. In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and, thereafter, notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@nccourt.net or by calling (530)362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day prior to the date and time set for hearing. If you do not so notify all other parties and the Court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling of the Court. Any argument is limited to five (5) minutes per party, unless the Court determines additional argument time is needed. See California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Personal appearances are permitted. You may also appear via video by arranging a remote Zoom appearance at the time notice of request for oral argument is made by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

Unless the Court orders otherwise, the Court will not be able to provide court SHALL SUBMIT A FORMAL ORDER SETTING OUT VERBATIM THE TENTATIVE RULING ANNOUNCED HEREIN (OR THE ORDER OF THE COURT FOLLOWING ORAL ARGUMENT SHOULD IT DIFFER FROM THE COURT 3.1312 AND SHALL, THEREAFTER, PREPARE, FILE AND SERVE NOTICE OF THE ORDER PURSUANT TO THE RULE OF COURT.

April 4, 2025 Civil Tentative Rulings

CL0002037 Joseph Pryor v. Sergio Aguilar, Jr.

Defendant Aguilar’s February 24, 2025, motion to set aside the default and default judgment is denied.

Firstly, defendant, the moving party, has failed to file a notice of hearing for today’s hearing and proof that the motion has been served on plaintiff. See California Rules of Court, rules 3.110 and 3.1300; Code of Civil Procedure § 1005.

Secondly, this court no longer has jurisdiction to hear the present motion. “An unlawful detainer action is a summary proceeding” where “[t]he sole issue before the court is the right to possession.” Vasey v. California Dance Co. (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 742, 746-747. It follows that there is nothing left that the court must decide in an unlawful detainer action once possession of the property has been determined. Ibid.; see also Boyd v. Carter (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1, 11, n. 5 (“This summary unlawful detainer proceeding concerned the right to possession of the premises, a matter that is no longer in issue because the Carters were forcibly evicted. The judgment having been reversed, the parties remain free to litigate any claims for damages arising from their lease or landlord/tenant relationship.”). Here, the return on the writ of possession was executed on March 4, 2025, and filed March 7, 2025.  As possession of the property has been restored to the plaintiff, relief is no longer available to the defendant in this unlawful detainer proceeding.

Accordingly, the motion to set aside default and default judgment is denied on both procedural and substantive grounds.

CU0000591 Antonio De La Pena, et al. vs. Nevada Woods Apartments
Plaintiffs’ motion to strike and tax costs is granted in part and otherwise denied.

Plaintiffs’ motion to tax costs because of financial hardship is denied. “[Plaintiffs] cite[] no authority, and [the court is] aware of none, holding that the language of section 1033.5 allowing costs that are ‘reasonable in amount’ and ‘reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation’ also confers authority for the court to analyze whether costs are reasonable based on the losing party's ability to pay.” LAOSD Asbestos Cases (2018) 25 Cal.App.5th 1116, 1124–1125.

The motion to tax the credit card transaction fees of $13.75 and $28.05 is denied. These fees appear to be reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation. See Code Civ. Proc. §1033.5(c).

The court accepts defendant’s concession to tax the two $45.00 “shipping and handling” charges. Postage fees are not permissible costs. The motion to tax these items is granted. See Code Civ. Proc. §1033.5(b)(3).

The motion to tax the two $75.00 “zoom” charges is granted. Zoom fees are similar to telephone charges, which are expressly not permitted. See Code Civ. Proc. §1033.5(b)(3).

The court accepts defendant’s concession to tax the late fee of $300.00. The motion to tax is granted as to this item.

The motion to tax the $294.00 in “court dispatch fees” is denied. These fees appear to be reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation. See Code Civ. Proc. §1033.5(c).

CU0000861 Patrick H. Dwyer vs. Dr. Andrea L. Harris, et al.
Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses is continued on the court’s own motion to April 18, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. Plaintiff attempted to file the present motion on January 28, 2025; however, such filing was rejected by the clerk’s office due to an unavailable hearing date. Thereafter, on February 21, 2025, plaintiff re-noticed his motion. However, plaintiff seemingly did not file the memorandum of points and authorities or the separate statement. As such, the court’s file does not have all documents necessary to review the motion. Because the motion is opposed substantively, this court grants plaintiff permission to correct this issue. All documents related to the motion to compel further responses shall be filed by April 10, 2025.
CU0000951 Everlie Dahlen vs. Mark Claydon, et al.
Defendant’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Further Responses to Discovery is granted in part, and deferred in part pending argument.

As to item # 21, the request is moot. Plaintiff provided a further response after the present motion was filed.

As to item #22 and #23, the motion is granted. Plaintiff must produce all responsive documents under her control responsive to the request.

As to item #25, plaintiff shall verify whether she is pursuing a claim for severe emotional distress, treatment therefor from Joan Goddard, MFT, and resulting loss of income from such emotional distress, or withdrawing the same. If plaintiff is pursuing such a claim, the court will need further information from the parties to determine whether plaintiff has implicitly and partially waived her constitutional right of privacy in connection with all or a portion of the Goddard records. See Davis v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1008, 1017.

The requests for sanctions for $1,800.00 are granted under Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.010(e)(unmeritorious objection without substantial justification), (i)(failure to meet/confer), section 2023.050 (sanctions), 2031.310(h) (unsuccessful opposition without substantial justification or showing that the same would be unjust).

CU0001723 Umpqua Bank vs. Joseph A. Miller, DMD, Inc., et al.
Umpqua Bank’s request for the court to expand the receivership to one for all purposes is granted.

The appointment of a receiver is a provisional equitable remedy. The receiver's role is to preserve the status quo between the parties while litigation is pending. See Southern California Sunbelt Developers, Inc. v. Banyan Limited Partnership (2017) 8 Cal.App.5th 910, 925. “ ‘The receiver is but the hand of the court, to aid it in preserving and managing the property involved in the suit for the benefit of those to whom it may ultimately be determined to belong.’” Marsch v. Williams (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 238, 248 (citations omitted). A receivership is “ ‘an ancillary remedy which does not affect the ultimate outcome of the action.’ ” California Sunbelt Developers, Inc., 8 Cal.App.5th at 925.

Code of Civil Procedure section 564 generally sets forth the statutory circumstances under which a receiver can be appointed. Marsch, 23 Cal.App.4th at 248.

“The requirements of [section 564] are jurisdictional, and without a showing bringing the receiver within one of the subdivisions of that section the court's order appointing a receiver is void.” Turner v. Superior Court (1977) 72 Cal.App.3d 804, 811. To invoke the authority of the court to appoint a receiver under section 564, a moving party must establish the jurisdictional requirement by a preponderance of the evidence. See Alhambra-Shumway Mines, Inc. v. Alhambra Gold Mine Corp. (1953) 116 Cal.App.2d 869, 873 (Under subdivision (b)(1), the plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of the evidence a “joint interest with [the] defendant in the property; that the same was in danger of being lost, removed or materially injured, and that plaintiff's right to possession was probable.”) “ ‘Evidence to justify the appointment of a receiver may be presented “in the form of allegations in a complaint or other pleading, by affidavit or by testimony.” ’ ” Republic of China v. Chang (1955) 134 Cal.App.2d 124, 132 (italics omitted).

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 564, a receiver can be appointed, inter alia, in the following cases:

(1) In an action … by a creditor to subject any property or fund to the creditor's claim …, on the application of the plaintiff, or of any party whose right to or interest in the property or fund, or the proceeds of the property or fund, is probable, and where it is shown that the property or fund is in danger of being lost, removed, or materially injured.

…

(6) Where a corporation is insolvent, or in imminent danger of insolvency, or has forfeited its corporate rights.

…

(9) In all other cases where necessary to preserve the property or rights of any party.

The court has considered the record as whole including all submissions by plaintiff, the current appointed receiver and defendants. The court is persuaded, on the record presented, that a receivership is warranted and necessary. Plaintiff has established by a preponderance of credible evidence that: (1) it has a probable right or interest in the property sought to be placed in receivership and that the property is in danger of destruction, removal or misappropriation; (2) the instant dentistry business is, at the very least, in imminent danger of insolvency; and (3) the instant dentistry business has defaulted on its loan obligations to plaintiff and contractually consented to the appointment of a receiver upon default. Defendants have not presented sufficient admissible, compelling or credible evidence to persuade the court otherwise.

CU0001762 William Dean Ferreira vs. Stephanie Diane Stone-Ferreira, et al.
On the court’s motion, defendant Malone’s Anti-Slapp motion to strike is continued until May 23, 2025, at 9:00 a.m.in Dept. 6. Plaintiff filed an untimely opposition on March 28, 2025. Defendant Malone filed a reply thereto on April 1, 2025. The court has made no decision as to whether it will consider the untimely opposition. That said, defendant Malone is granted permission to file a supplemental reply addressing the merits no later than 10 court days prior to the scheduled hearing.

CU0001788 Robert Tonnies v. Mark Gold

Defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees is granted in part.

Preliminarily, plaintiff filed an untimely opposition that does not contain proof of service on the defendant. In the court’s discretion, the court has read and considered the opposition.

As to the merits, Welfare & Institutions Code section 15657.03 provides: “The prevailing party in an action brought under this section may be awarded court costs and attorney’s fees, if any.” (Italics added). This provision does not define “prevailing party.”

Courts interpreting similar provisions in the context of civil harassment petitions have looked to Code of Civil Procedure section 1032 to define prevailing party. See Adler v. Vaicius (1993) 21 Cal.App.4th 1770, 1777 (“Since [Code of Civil Procedure] section 527.6 does not define “prevailing party,” the general definition of “prevailing party” in section 1032 may be used.”); Elster v. Friedman (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1439, 1443(same).

Code of Civil Procedure section 1032(a)(4) provides: “ ‘Prevailing party’ includes ... a defendant in whose favor a dismissal is entered, a defendant where neither plaintiff nor defendant obtains any relief, and a defendant as against those plaintiffs who do not recover any relief against that defendant.” Any award of attorney’s fees is discretionary. See Krug v. Maschmeier (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 796, 802 (“decision whether to award attorney fees to a prevailing party—plaintiff or defendant—under section 527.6(i) is a matter committed to the discretion of the trial court.”).

“Courts construing statutes that contain attorney fees provisions that do not define the term ‘prevailing party,’ . . . have adopted th[e] practical approach to determine the recoverability of attorney fees in pretrial voluntary dismissal cases.” Castro v. Superior Court (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 1010, 1020. “Under the practical approach, the court determines the prevailing party by analyzing which party realized its litigation objectives.” Id. at 1019; see, e.g., Santisas v. Goodin (1998) 17 Cal.4th 599, 614-23.

In the present case, the action was voluntarily dismissed by petitioner after respondent filed a detailed factual response in the companion case, CU0001791. The court concludes that respondent was the prevailing party that realized their litigation objectives.

Thus, the motion for attorney’s fees is granted. Reasonable fees are $1,837.50 (6.125 hours at $300.00 per hour).

8. CU0001791 Robert Tonnies v. Karen Nathanson

Defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees is granted in part.

Preliminarily, plaintiff filed an untimely opposition that does not contain proof of service on the defendant. In the court’s discretion, the court has read and considered the opposition.

In the present case, the action was voluntarily dismissed by petitioner after respondent filed a detailed factual response. The court concludes that respondent was the prevailing party that realized its litigation objectives.

Thus, the motion for attorney’s fees is granted. Reasonable fees are $1,837.50 (6.125 hours at $300.00 per hour).

9. PR0000214 Estate of Mathew Jay Forrest

Ms. Tapella’s motion to be relieved as counsel is granted. This order shall become effective upon filing proof of service of the signed order after hearing on the client, Md. Akin. The court hereby sets a status hearing regarding representation for May 19, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. Ms. Akin is ordered to appear. Ms. Tapella is directed to include such hearing date and order in her proposed order after hearing.

3-28-25 Civil Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

CL0001166 GAYLORD SPURGEON, et al. vs. JOEL PEREZ, et al.
This tentative ruling is issued by Judge Horn (Ret.). If oral argument is requested, such oral argument shall be heard on Friday, March 28, 2025, at 10:00 am in Dept. 6.

Defendant Happy Daze’s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted. The court notes that three defendants initially filed the present motion. However, as defendants Lemke and Perez have been dismissed, the case remains solely against defendant Happy Daze.

Standard of Review

The function of a motion for summary judgment or adjudication is to allow a determination as to whether an opposing party cannot show evidentiary support for a pleading or claim and to enable an order of summary dismissal without the need for trial. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843. In analyzing motions for summary judgment, courts must apply a three-step analysis: (1) identify the issues framed by the pleadings to be addressed; (2) determine whether moving party showed facts justifying a judgment in movant's favor; and (3) determine whether the opposing party demonstrated the existence of a triable, material issue of fact. Sun v. City of Oakland (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 1177, 1182-83; McGarry v. Sax (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 983, 994; Hinesley v. Oakshade Town Center (2005) 135 Cal. App. 4th 289, 294.

Objections to Evidence

Defendants’ Objections to the Declaration of Robert Lemke are overruled in their entirety. Robert Lemke, as officer and manager has authority to testify as to the authentication of the business records.

Plaintiffs’ Objections to Defendants’ Objections are overruled in their entirety.

Factual Background

Plaintiffs purchased an RV from Defendant Happy Daze on September 17, 2016 for $26,000.00. Plaintiffs allege Defendant intentionally concealed a mechanical defect in the RV, which was not discovered until 2022.

Analysis

The sole cause of action in the complaint is for intentional misrepresentation. “The pleadings determine the issues to be addressed by a summary judgment motion … and the declarations filed in connection with such motion ‘must be directed to the issues raised by the pleadings.” (Knapp v. Doherty, (2004) 123 Cal. App. 4th 76, 84.) There is no cause of action set forth for negligent misrepresentation. Thus, Plaintiffs’ arguments in opposition to the motion relating to negligent misrepresentation are without merit.

To establish a claim for intentional misrepresentation under California Law, a plaintiff must prove each of the following elements, “(1) a misrepresentation, (2) knowledge of falsity, (3) intent to induce reliance, (4) actual and justifiable reliance, and (5) resulting damage.” (Aton Ctr., Inc. v. United Healthcare Ins. Co. (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 1214, 1245.) A misrepresentation is an assertion made by the defendant with the knowledge that it is or may be untrue. (Seeger v. Odell (1941) 18 Cal.2d 409, 414.)

Here, Plaintiffs have provided no evidence whatsoever that Defendant Happy Daze had knowledge of the falsity of any statements made. Further, there are no allegations of “‘false representations made recklessly and without regard for their truth in order to induce action by another are the equivalent of misrepresentations knowingly and intentionally uttered.’ ” (Engalla v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 951, 974, quoting Yellow Creek Logging Corp. v. Dare (1963) 216 Cal.App.2d 50, 55.)

Conclusion

Thus, the motion for summary judgment is granted. Defendant shall prepare a proposed Judgment for this Court’s signature.

The CMC is dropped, as no trial date is necessary.

CU0001024 WALTER NICHOLAS et al vs. FCA US, LLC

Plaintiffs’ February 25, 2025, motion to continue defendant’s summary judgment motion is granted for purposes of briefing only; it is denied for purposes of conducting further discovery.
Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (h), provides:

If it appears from the affidavits submitted in opposition to a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication, or both, that facts essential to justify opposition may exist but cannot for reasons stated, be presented, the court shall deny the motion, order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or discovery to be had, or make any other order as may be just. The application to continue the motion to obtain necessary discovery may also be made by ex parte motion at any time on or before the date the opposition response to the motion is due.

“Given the high stakes involved in motions for summary judgment and summary adjudication, continuances under section 437c, subdivision (h), are virtually mandated upon a good faith showing by affidavit that a continuance is needed to obtain facts essential to justify opposition to the motion.” Braganza v. Albertson's LLC (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 144, 152 (citation and quotations omitted.) “The affidavit is required to show that (1) the facts to be obtained are essential to opposing the motion; (2) there is reason to believe such facts may exist; and (3) the reasons why additional time is needed to obtain [or discover] these facts.” Ibid. (quotations omitted). Of note, “a party who seeks a continuance under section 437c, subdivision (h), must show why the discovery necessary to oppose the motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication could not have been completed sooner, and accordingly requires the court to grant the continuance.” Id. at 156.

At bar, the motion for summary judgment was filed on December 19, 2024 and set for hearing on March 7, 2025. Defendant’s opposition was due on February 14, 2025. After the opposition was due, on February 20, 2025, plaintiffs filed their PMK notice of deposition set for March 4, 2025, which plaintiffs contend is essential to their claim for fraudulent inducement-concealment. Of note plaintiffs have made no showing whatsoever as to why this discovery could not have been initiated and completed in advance of their opposition deadline. On this record, plaintiffs have failed to exercise appropriate diligence in connection with the discovery at issue. Their request for a continuance to conduct discovery is denied. See, e.g., id. at 156 (affirming denial of continuance where plaintiff failed to show diligence in completing floor inspection and testing).

The summary judgment motion will be reset for hearing on May 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m., the first available hearing date. The parties shall file their remaining briefs in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure. Trial shall be set at a case management conference calendared for June 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m.

CU0001845 MARK GOLD, et al. vs. ROBERT A. TONNIES, et al.
Defendants’ February 24, 2025, motion to dismiss is denied. Defendants have failed to include the following in connection with their motion, among other things: a notice of motion, see California Rules of Court, rule 3.110(a), a memorandum of points and authorities, see rule 3.1112(a)(3), and a proof of service. See Code of Civil Procedure § 1005(b). Assuming, arguendo, that defendants’ motion to dismiss is a demurrer, defendants have not established that the various causes of action, as alleged, fail to state claims for relief.

3-21-25 Civil Tentative Rulings

CL0002280 Ian Garfinkel v. KAF&F Properties LLC
Defendant Oreda Hagy’s January 17, 2025, motion to set aside the default and default judgment is denied.

Secondly, this court no longer has jurisdiction to hear the present motion. “An unlawful detainer action is a summary proceeding” where “[t]he sole issue before the court is the right to possession.” Vasey v. California Dance Co. (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 742, 746-747. It follows that there is nothing left that the court must decide in an unlawful detainer action once possession of the property has been determined. Ibid.; see also Boyd v. Carter (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1, 11, n. 5 (“This summary unlawful detainer proceeding concerned the right to possession of the premises, a matter that is no longer in issue because the Carters were forcibly evicted. The judgment having been reversed, the parties remain free to litigate any claims for damages arising from their lease or landlord/tenant relationship.”). Here, the return on the writ of possession was executed on January 23, 2025 and filed January 29, 2025. As possession of the property has been restored to the plaintiff, relief is no longer available to the defendant in this unlawful detainer proceeding.

CU0001309 Quinn Coburn vs. Daniel Marsh
Defendant’s February 21, 2025, motion for a stay is procedurally defective. Defendant, the moving party, has failed to file proof that the motion has been served on plaintiff. See California Rules of Court, rule 3.1300; Code of Civil Procedure § 1005.

The court, on its own motion, continues the previously issued stay in connection with the December 19, 2024 writ of execution and amended writ of execution.

The court, on its own motion, directs the parties to show cause why the default, default judgment, abstract of judgment and writ of possession should not be set aside based on potential inadequate service of process.

The proof of service filed on April 15, 2024 indicates that defendant was served by personal delivery of the summons and complaint to defendant’s wife on April 12, 2024 without additional elaboration.

Code of Civil Procedure section 415.20(b) provides:

If a copy of the summons and complaint cannot with reasonable diligence be personally delivered to the person to be served, as specified in Section 416.60, 416.70, 416.80, or 416.90, a summons may be served by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint at the person's dwelling house, usual place of abode, usual place of business, or usual mailing address other than a United States Postal Service post office box, in the presence of a competent member of the household or a person apparently in charge of his or her office, place of business, or usual mailing address other than a United States Postal Service post office box, at least 18 years of age, who shall be informed of the contents thereof, and by thereafter mailing a copy of the summons and of the complaint by first-class mail, postage prepaid to the person to be served at the place where a copy of the summons and complaint were left. Service of a summons in this manner is deemed complete on the 10th day after the mailing.

The parties shall address whether service has been properly effectuated under this statute.

Plaintiff shall file and serve his brief by April 4, 2025, noon. Defendant shall file and serve his brief by April 18, 2025. A hearing regarding the same is set for May 9, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 6.

3. CU0001602 Stonecrest Acquisitions, LLC vs. County of Nevada

The January 22, 2025, demurrer to the first amended petition by the County of Nevada is sustained without leave to amend.

“A demurrer tests the sufficiency of the complaint as a matter of law.” Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Boyle (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 1020, 1034. “It has been consistently held that ‘“a plaintiff is required only to set forth the essential facts of his case with reasonable precision and with particularity sufficient to acquaint a defendant with the nature, source and extent of his cause of action”’” Doheny Park Terrace Homeowners Assn. Inc. v. Truck Ins. Exchange (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 1076, 1099, cited with approval by Doe v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 42 Cal.4th 531, 550.

A demurrer lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 430.30, 430.70. Thus, the only issue addressed by a demurrer is “whether the complaint, as it stands, unconnected with extraneous matters, states a cause of action.'” Hahn v. Mirda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747; Accord McKenney v. Purepac Pharmaceutical Co. (2008) 162 Cal.App.4th 72, 79.

Carloss v. County of Alameda (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 116, 126–127, sets forth the general law with respect to the dispute at issue:

“The general revenue of a city and county is collected by a tax on all nonexempt real property within the jurisdiction of the taxing agency.” (5 Miller & Starr, Cal. Real Estate (3d ed.) § 11:158, p. 11–512.) Under the statute, tax on real property “is a lien against the property assessed.” (§ 2187.) If the tax is unpaid, a default is declared and tax-defaulted residential property may be sold after five years of delinquency. (§§ 3351-3352, 3361, subd. (a).) Tax-defaulted property is generally sold at public auction to the highest bidder. (§§ 3691, 3693.) The sale proceeds are used to pay taxes and costs. (§§ 3698.5, 4672, 4672.1, 4672.2, 4673, 4673.1.) Any excess in the sale proceeds is held in a trust fund and “parties of interest” in the property have one year to file a claim for the excess proceeds. (§§ 4674, 4675.) Unclaimed proceeds are transferred to the county general fund. (§ 4674.)

“[P]arties of interest and their order of priority are: [¶] (A) First, lienholders of record prior to the recordation of the tax deed to the purchaser in order of their priority. [¶] (B) Second, any person with title of record to all or any portion of the property prior to recordation of the tax deed to the purchaser.” ( § 4675, subd. (e)(1).)

Id. at 126-127 (italics added).

Critical to resolution of the instant dispute is the meaning of title of record.

“Title of record” is not defined in the statute or elsewhere in any California code. Title is generally understood to denote ownership or “the legal right to control and dispose of property” (Black's Law Dict. (8th ed. 2004) p. 1522, col. 2) and “title of record” has been variously defined as “title as it appears in the public records after the deed is properly recorded” (id. at pp. 1523, col. 2, 1524, col. 1) or “[a] title to real estate, evidenced and provable by one or more conveyances or other instruments all of which are duly entered on the public land records” (Black's Law Dict. (5th ed. 1979) pp. 1145, col. 2, 1146, col. 1). “Any written ‘instrument’ that affects the title to or possession of real property” may be recorded (5 Miller & Starr, Cal. Real Estate, supra, § 11:4, p. 11–21), including a grant deed, deed of trust and numerous other instruments (id., § 11:6). While a recorded grant deed may be the best evidence, there is no language in the statute specifying that only a recorded grant deed may establish “title of record.”

Id. at 127–128.

Of significance, however, “title of record may be established in the absence of a recorded grant deed.” Id. at 132. The standard is as follows:

“Title of record” must be proven, and a recorded grant deed will most often be the best and simplest form of evidence to establish that fact. But when for some reason the grant deed cannot be produced, that proof may consist of recorded instruments of various types, the assessor's records, and testimony that, as a whole, establishes that the claimant or the claimant's predecessor in interest held title of record immediately prior to the tax-default sale.

Id. at 130.

The county argues, among other things, that the petition fails because it does not allege any facts to show that petitioner is a party of interest entitled to claim excess proceeds from the tax sale. See Mot. at 6:13 et seq. Petitioner argues that the petition adequately alleges facts evidencing Stonecrest’s status as a party of interest, specifically as a person with title of record. See Opp. at 4:9 et seq. (specific allegations cited by Stonecrest as sufficient). The county has the more persuasive argument.

At bar, there is a significant defect that appears on the face of the amended pleading. There are no facts alleged that establish that petitioner/claimant held title of record immediately prior to the tax-default sale. Petitioner, of course, alleges that heirs (i.e., the children of John Robinson) to decedent William Robinson assigned their interests to petitioner via a contract and certain assignments. See Petition ¶ 10.e. Those documents, however, make clear that the heirs did not have marketable title to the property, that petitioner was only acquiring a potential future interest in the property, and that all parties recognized that petitioner could only obtain marketable title to the property once decedent’s estate was probated. See Petition, Ex. A (and Exs. 1-3 attached thereto). There are no allegations in the petition to suggest that the condition precedent in that contract was satisfied. There are no allegations that petitioner obtained title prior to the tax-default sale or that the heirs obtained title to the property prior to the tax-default sale. In order to allege that one is a person with title of record, as noted previously, there must be allegations that, as a whole, will establish that the claimant or the claimant’s predecessor in interest “held title of record immediately prior to the tax-default sale.” Carloss, 242 Cal.App.4th at 130. “Title is generally understood to denote ownership or ‘the legal right to control and dispose of property.’ ” Ibid. at 127. Here, there are insufficient allegations that either petitioner or petitioner’s predecessor in interest—the heirs—owned the property, or had a legal right to control or dispose of the property prior to the tax-default sale. There is no suggestion that the property was probated prior to the tax-default sale. Moreover, there is no allegation that any other potential lawful procedure for collection or transfer of real property was initiated under the Probate Code prior to the tax-default sale. A demurrer on this ground, thus, is well founded.

In addition, Revenue and Taxation Code section 4675(c), provides:

Any person or entity who in any way acts on behalf of, or in place of, any party of interest with respect to filing a claim for any excess proceeds shall submit proof with the claim that the amount and source of excess proceeds have been disclosed to the party of interest and that the party of interest has been advised of their right to file a claim for the excess proceeds on their own behalf directly with the county at no cost.

At bar, petitioner alleges that that the heirs assigned their interests in the subject property to petitioner. Petitioner, thus, claims to be acting “in place of” the heirs as a party of interest with respect to filing a claim for excess proceeds. Petitioner has failed to allege, however, that it has complied with the requirements of subsection (c), i.e., that it submitted proof with its claim that the amount and source of excess proceeds have been disclosed to the heirs and that the heirs have been advised of their right to file a claim for the excess proceeds on their own behalf directly with the county at no cost.

A demurrer should not be sustained without leave to amend if the complaint states a cause of action under any theory or if there is a reasonable probability the defect can be cured by amendment. See Seidler v. Municipal Court (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 1229, 1233.

Petitioner has been afforded a previous opportunity to amend its petition and has failed to demonstrate that there is a reasonable probability that the defects noted can be cured by amendment. Leave to amend is denied.

4. CU0001683 County of Nevada vs. Michael James Taylor

The February 23, 2025, demurrer to the cross-complaint by the County of Nevada is removed from calendar without prejudice. The court is in receipt of an apparent notice of stay from the bankruptcy court. It appears, however, that the bankruptcy filing may be incomplete and the case potentially subject to dismissal. The court continues the case management conference (CMC) to May 19, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. The parties shall update the court on the status of the bankruptcy in their CMC statements prior thereto. Should this case proceed, the county may re-notice its motion for hearing.

March 14, 2025 Civil Tentative Rulings

CU0000284 Tod DuBois v. Scott Fetty, et al.

No appearances are required. At the request of the parties, the following motions are continued until May 2, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in Dept. 6 (the next available hearing date): plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the complaint to substitute the name of Defendant Rollins Lakeside Resort to Defendant Lake Life Resort, LLC, plaintiff’s motion for injunction directed at defendant Lake Life Resort, LLC, and plaintiff’s motion for sanctions.

CU0000410 Taylor Strunk v. Stagecoach Motel, et al.

Defendants’ October 1, 2024, motion for monetary sanctions is granted; the motion for terminating sanctions is denied.

Request for Judicial Notice:

Defendants’ request for judicial notice is granted in its entirety.

Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.300(e) provides:

If a party fails to obey an order compelling further response to interrogatories,

the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an

issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010). In lieu of, or in addition to, that sanction,

the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with

Section 2023.010).

Similarly, Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310(i) provides:

Except as provided in subdivision (j), if a party fails to obey an order compelling further response, the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010). In lieu of, or in addition to, that sanction, the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).

Monetary and terminating sanctions may also be imposed against a party who misuses the discovery process as defined by Code of Civil Procedure Section 2023.030:

Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.

Making, without substantial justification, an unmeritorious objection to discovery.

Disobeying a court order to provide discovery.

Failing to confer in person, by telephone, or by letter with an opposing party or attorney in a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve informally any dispute concerning discovery, if the section governing a particular discovery motion requires the filing of a declaration stating facts showing that an attempt at informal resolution has been made.

The imposition of a terminating sanction is typically not to be resorted to by the court as a first measure. See, e.g., Reedy v. Bussell (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 1272, 1292 (terminating sanctions are justified by persistent and willful non-compliance in discovery]) see also Sherman v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc. (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1152, 1163 (repeated failure to respond combined with non-compliance with court order justifies imposition of terminating sanctions); McGinty v. Superior Court (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 204, 210 (extreme sanctions are disfavored).

In evaluating the propriety of terminating sanctions, often described as the sanction of last resort, it has been held that “dismissal is a proper sanction to punish the failure to comply with a rule or an order only if the court's authority cannot be vindicated through the imposition of a less severe alternative.” Rail Services of America v. State Compensation Ins. Fund (2003) 110 Cal App 4^th 323, 331; see Lopez v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc. (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 566, 572-573 (trial court “erred in issuing terminating sanctions as the initial remedial measure without first attempting to compel compliance with its discovery orders by using lesser sanctions or by imposing evidentiary or issue sanctions”).

Moreover, where a motion to compel has been previously granted, “the sanction should not operate in such a fashion as to put the prevailing party in a better position than he would have had if he had obtained the discovery sought and it had been completely favorable to his cause.” Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 793.

In the instant action, the court finds that plaintiff’s conduct warrants the imposition of monetary sanctions. There is no substantial justification as to why defendants were forced to incur the time and expenses of two motions before plaintiffs finally served verified responses without objections.

Before the motions, plaintiffs failed to respond to discovery, served objections after defendants granted multiple extensions of time to serve responses, failed to meet and confer to attempt informal discovery dispute resolution, and failed to comply with the court’s order to serve discovery and pay monetary sanctions.

In the October 14, 2024, declaration, plaintiffs’ attorney informed the court that they lost contact with their clients between March and May 2024 but then indicated that contact was resumed in October 2024. As noted by defendants’ attorney, it is unclear from the declaration whether there was contact between May and October 2024 and there is no explanation as to the lack of contact when plaintiffs have resided at the same address for more than five years. In any event, failure on the part of clients to maintain contact with their counsel or vice versa does not constitute appropriate justification for the discovery lapses here.

Plaintiffs served the responses to defendants’ discovery requests on or about November 5, 2024. However, the circumstances set forth in the plaintiffs’ opposition to the motion and declaration of plaintiffs’ attorney do not show circumstances that would make the imposition of monetary sanctions unjust. Therefore, plaintiffs and their attorneys are ordered to pay monetary sanctions of $1,740.50 in connection with the instant motion. The court confirms its previous order of sanctions against plaintiffs and their counsel, jointly and severally, in the amount of $4,120.00. All sanctions must be paid within 30 days.

CU0001651 Joseph Sacks vs. Navy Federal Credit Union
On the court’s motion, defendant’s demurrer is continued for hearing until April 18, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in Department 6.

Plaintiff alleges Navy Federal violated section 1026.38 of Regulation Z of the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) by failing to disclose “accurate and complete financial information in the Closing Disclosure,” which resulted in “significant financial harm, including increased mortgage payments and insurance costs.” Comp. ¶¶ 38, 39.

Each party shall provide briefing of no more than three pages by no later than March 28, 2025 as to the following: (1) What are the elements of a cause of action for violation of TILA in general? (2) What are the elements of a cause of action for violation of section 1026.38 in particular?

CU0001760 In the Matter of County of Nevada

The unopposed petition of the County of Nevada for an order to abate substandard building and appoint Richardson C. Griswold as receiver is granted as prayed except as noted herein.

Health and Safety Code section 17890.7 authorizes the court to appoint a receiver to oversee the rehabilitation of properties deemed to be substandard if the property owner fails to comply with an order or notice issued by a local agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 17980.6 after a reasonable time.

In the instant action, petitioner has made a sufficient showing that the subject property is a danger to occupants and the surrounding community. Respondent was given more than a reasonable amount of time (13 years to be exact) to rehabilitate the subject property with no response.

A prevailing party is generally entitled to recover all costs of enforcement relating to the property, including its attorney fees, pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 17980.7. The court denies without prejudice petitioner’s request that it presently be deemed the prevailing party entitled to recovery of costs of enforcement and attorney fees. Petitioner may file an appropriate noticed motion at the conclusion of the case if it seeks adjudication of the same.

CU20-084697 Barbara Miller vs. Pamela Gorman

Plaintiff’s November 15, 2024, motion for new trial is denied.

There can be only one final judgment, and this judgment is the final determination of the rights of the parties. See Sullivan v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 288, 304, citing Code Civ. Proc. § 577. Where there is an amended judgment, the nature and effect of the amended judgment (i.e., whether it or the original is the final judgment) depends on whether the amendment substantially changes the judgment. See Ellis v. Ellis (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 837, 842. Jurisdictional deadlines run from the actual final judgment. Ibid. Generally, where an amended judgment merely adds costs, attorney fees, and interest, the original judgment is not substantially changed, such that the original judgment is the final judgment. See Torres v. City of San Diego (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 214, 222.
There were two judgments entered in this case. The judgment entered on May 24, 2024, fully adjudicated all rights of the parties—it provided that plaintiff received a jury verdict award of $7,500, and defendant was entitled to costs, subject to a future determination, pursuant to a Section 998 offer. The judgment entered on November 4, 2024, simply added defendant’s costs. The subsequent judgment did not substantially modify the original judgment. The final judgment for purposes of the motion for a new trial, thus, was the original judgment entered on May 24, 2024.

Code of Civil Procedure Section 659 provides, in relevant part:

(a) The party intending to move for a new trial shall file with the clerk and serve upon each adverse party a notice of their intention to move for a new trial, … , either:

(1) After the decision is rendered and before the entry of judgment.

(2) Within 15 days of the date of serving notice of entry of judgment by the clerk of the court pursuant to Section 664.5, or service upon them by any party of written notice of entry of judgment, or within 180 days after the entry of judgment, whichever is earliest; ….

(Italics added).

Code of Civil Procedure section 660(c) provides, in relevant part:

[T]he power of the court to rule on a motion for a new trial shall expire 75 days after the

mailing of notice of entry of judgment by the clerk of the court pursuant to Section 664.5 or 75 days after service on the moving party by any party

of written notice of entry of judgment, whichever is earlier, or if that notice

has not been given, 75 days after the filing of the first notice of intention to

move for a new trial. If the motion is not determined within the 75-day period,

or within that period as extended, the effect shall be a denial of the motion without further order of the court. 

(Italics added).

These deadlines are jurisdictional. Smith v. Super. Ct. (1976) 64 Cal.App.3d 434, 436; Maroney v. Iacobsohn (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 473, 481–483; Dodge v. Super. Ct. (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 513, 518. “[A]n order granting a new trial is in excess of jurisdiction and void if, for example, it is made ... upon a notice of intention that is filed … too late …, or if the court purports to grant the motion after expiration of the statutory time for ruling.” Kabran v. Sharp Memorial Hospital (2017) 2 Cal.5th 330, 337 (citations omitted).

At bar, the final judgment was entered on May 24, 2024. Defendant served plaintiff notice of entry of that judgment on May 30, 2024. Plaintiff’s deadline to serve and file her intent to move for new trial was 15 days later, i.e., on June 14, 2024. Plaintiff did not file her intent to move for new trial until November 5, 2024. Thus, the notice of intention was untimely. In addition, the court’s deadline to rule on such a motion was 75 days later on August 13, 2024. The court has not yet ruled on the motion and could not do so after expiration of the statutory time for ruling.

In the alternative or in addition, assuming, arguendo, the second November 4, 2024, judgment was the final judgment, and plaintiff timely file her notice of intention on November 5, 2024, the court’s 75-day deadline to rule would have been January 21, 2025. Here again, the court has not yet ruled on the motion and could not do so after expiration of the statutory time for ruling.

The court lacks jurisdiction to consider plaintiff’s motion for new trial. The motion is denied.

6. CU0001052 Frances Cesak v. Lake Wildwood Association

Defendant Lake Wildwood Association (LWA)’s motion for summary judgment is granted.

Standard of Review

The function of a motion for summary judgment or adjudication is to allow a determination as to whether an opposing party cannot show evidentiary support for a pleading or claim and to enable an order of summary dismissal without the need for trial. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843. In analyzing motions for summary judgment, courts must apply a three-step analysis: (1) identify the issues framed by the pleadings to be addressed; (2) determine whether moving party showed facts justifying a judgment in movant's favor; and (3) determine whether the opposing party demonstrated the existence of a triable, material issue of fact. See Wellsfry v. Ocean Colony Partners, LLC (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 1075, 1084; Sun v. City of Oakland (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 1177, 1182-83; McGarry v. Sax (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 983, 994; Hinesley v. Oakshade Town Center (2005) 135 Cal. App. 4th 289, 294.

Factual Background

While plaintiff was driving her golf cart on defendant LWA premises, the golf cart frame caught on an unmarked tree stump and plaintiff’s golf cart came to an abrupt stop. Plaintiff was forcefully ejected from the cart and thrown through the air causing serious injuries.

There are two causes of action set forth in the complaint: general negligence and premises liability.

Assumption of the Risk Doctrine

The law applicable to the instant dispute is well summarized in Wellsfry v. Ocean Colony Partners, LLC (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 1075:

“[P]articipation in an active sport is governed by primary assumption of risk, and a defendant owes no duty of care to protect a plaintiff against risks inherent in the sport.” [Citation]. “When the risks are inherent, the defendant does not have a ‘duty to protect the plaintiff from those risks [citation] or to take steps to reduce those risks.’ ” [Citation]. Nonetheless, the courts have held that “[i]n any case in which the primary assumption of risk doctrine applies,” the owners and operators of sports venues owe participants “a duty ‘not to act so as to increase the risk of injury over that inherent in the activity.’ [Citation.] [And,] owners and operators of sports venues ... have an additional duty to undertake reasonable steps or measures to protect their customers’ ... safety—if they can do so without altering the nature of the sport ... .” [Citation].

Id. at 1085–1086 (citations and parentheticals omitted; italics added).

Our Supreme Court has held that the primary assumption of risk doctrine applies to golf played on an outdoor course. [Citation]. The open question is whether the inherent risk of playing golf on an outdoor course includes risks associated with the topographical features of the course. We find it does.

Golf is a sport whose object is for players to use special clubs to hit a small ball over lengthy distances and ultimately into a hole in the ground surface. When golf is played outdoors, it is common knowledge that the game does not use a “standardized playing area,” but rather takes place on the varied natural terrain of the ground surface of the course. Because each golf course is unique, golfers can reasonably expect to encounter myriad variations in the ground surface and obstacles as they traverse a golf course. [Citation]. As explained by OCP's Director of Maintenance and Superintendent Daniel Miller, “[t]he type of grass used, such as Bermuda, Bentgrass, Zoysia, Poa Annua, or Ryegrass, the presence or absence of trees, bushes, roots, holes, protuberances, furrows, gouges, rocks, acorns, seeds, and other conditions of the terrain, can and regularly do affect the golfer's experience, both in terms of how the ball interacts with the terrain and in the color, density, and the overall appearance of the terrain and the feel and atmosphere of the course.” Hence, the ground surface of a golf course “establishes a significant portion of the challenge and atmosphere of golf and constitutes the interface between the golfer ... and nature that is part of the gestalt of golf.”

We therefore conclude one who plays golf on an outdoor course assumes those risks associated with the topographical features of the course.

Id. at 1086 (citations and parentheticals omitted).

At bar, defendant asserts that “the common law doctrine of assumption of risk negates the liability of a defendant to a plaintiff engaged in playing golf on defendant’s property.” Defendant, however, has failed to meet its initial burden of showing that (1) its maintenance of the golf course had not increased the risk of injury beyond that inherent in the risk of playing golf, and (2) it had not failed to take reasonable steps to minimize the risk of injury that would not have altered the fundamental nature of the sport. Compare with id. at 1089. In the alternative, there are material disputed issues of fact related to the same. See Plaintiff’s Additional Material Facts Nos. 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10.

Express Release of Liability

California case law provides that under the doctrine of express assumption of risk, a signed waiver of liability may release liability for negligence. See, e.g., City of Santa Barbara v. Superior Court, 41 Cal.4th 747, 777 (2007).

Plaintiff had been a member of the Wildwood mutual benefit association for at least 10 years prior to her accident on July 28, 2022. In June of 2022, she signed an annual Public Unlimited Golf Package Agreement (“PUP”). The PUP Plaintiff signed included a release of liability against Wildwood for negligence, as well as a statement that Plaintiff assumed the risk of personal injury in return for the privilege of using Wildwood’s facilities.

Section 8 of the PUP provides as follows:

Assumption of Risk: “In consideration for the privilege of using LWA [“Wildwood”] facilities, each person entering upon or using LWA facilities agrees: (a) To accept all risks associated with the use of LWA facilities and to release LWA from and indemnify and defend LWA against any and all claims arising out of or in any way connected with such use of LWA facilities, except to the extent directly resulting from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the LWA or its employees…”

“With respect to the question of express waiver, the legal issue is not whether the particular risk of injury appellant suffered is inherent in the recreational activity to which the Release applies [citations], but simply the scope of the Release.” Hass v. RhodyCo Productions (2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 11, 27 (citation and quotation omitted). In the case at bar “reading the [release in question] as a whole—as would an ordinary person untrained in the law—[this court is] convinced it expresses [plaintiff’s] intent to assume all risks arising from [her use of LWA facilities and its golf course], including any risks related to [defendant’s] negligence.” Ibid.

Of note, “[e]ven if [a] Release [is] sufficient to block a claim for ordinary negligence …it is insufficient, as a matter of public policy, to preclude liability for gross negligence.” Id. at 31.

“[I]t cannot be said that the Complaint [herein]—which does not even mention the [release in question]—anticipated the [r]elease defense or raised gross negligence as a material issue which [defendant] was required to refute in order to succeed on summary judgment.” Id. at 33. “Instead, [defendant] met its initial burden by producing evidence of the existence of the [release in question] and its execution by [plaintiff]. The burden then shifted to the [plaintiff] to raise a triable issue of material fact as to gross negligence.” Ibid.

In its opposition, plaintiff does not argue that defendant was grossly negligent and does not point the court to any facts that she believes create a material dispute as to the same. On this record, thus, defendant is entitled to summary judgment based on plaintiff’s express assumption of the risk.

Defendant’s motion is granted.

March 7, 2025 Civil Tentative Rulings

CU0001052 Frances Cesak v. Lake Wildwood Association

On its own motion, defendant Lake Wildwood Association (LWA)’s motion for summary judgment is continued until March 14, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. No appearances are authorized for March 7, 2025.

The tentative ruling for March 14, 2025 is as follows: Defendant Lake Wildwood Association (LWA)’s motion for summary judgment is granted.

Standard of Review

The function of a motion for summary judgment or adjudication is to allow a determination as to whether an opposing party cannot show evidentiary support for a pleading or claim and to enable an order of summary dismissal without the need for trial. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843. In analyzing motions for summary judgment, courts must apply a three-step analysis: (1) identify the issues framed by the pleadings to be addressed; (2) determine whether moving party showed facts justifying a judgment in movant's favor; and (3) determine whether the opposing party demonstrated the existence of a triable, material issue of fact. See Wellsfry v. Ocean Colony Partners, LLC (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 1075, 1084; Sun v. City of Oakland (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 1177, 1182-83; McGarry v. Sax (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 983, 994; Hinesley v. Oakshade Town Center (2005) 135 Cal. App. 4th 289, 294.

Factual Background

There are two causes of action set forth in the complaint: general negligence and premises liability.

Assumption of the Risk Doctrine

The law applicable to the instant dispute is well summarized in Wellsfry v. Ocean Colony Partners, LLC (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 1075:

Id. at 1085–1086 (citations and parentheticals omitted; italics added).

We therefore conclude one who plays golf on an outdoor course assumes those risks associated with the topographical features of the course.

Id. at 1086 (citations and parentheticals omitted).

Express Release of Liability

Section 8 of the PUP provides as follows:

Defendant’s motion is granted.

February 28, 2025 Civil Tentative Rulings

CL0002108 Dorton Drywall, et al. vs. James Clarke, et al.
Defendants’ demurrer to the complaint is sustained with leave to amend. As currently pled, the complaint fails to allege that plaintiff was a licensed contractor as required by Business and Professions Code section 7031(a).

Defendants’ motion to strike is granted with leave to amend as to the prayer for damages and the prayer for foreclosure of mechanic’s lien. As currently pled, the complaint fails to allege that plaintiff was a licensed contractor as required by Business and Professions Code section 7031(a).

Defendants’ motion to strike is granted with leave to amend as to the prayer for interest.
Plaintiff’s response acknowledges that plaintiff is only entitled to the statutorily permitted interest as specified in Civil Code sections 3287 and 3289.

Defendants’ motion to strike is granted without leave to amend as to the prayer for attorney’s fees. Plaintiff concedes the contract at issue does not permit attorney’s fees.

Any amended complaint shall be filed and served within 10 calendar days after service of the signed order after hearing.

CU0000128 Douglas J. Schultz v. Marianne L. Stevenson, et al.

The court continues defendant Stevenson’s January 9, 2025 motion for judgment on the pleadings and plaintiff’s September 18, 2024 motion for interlocutory judgment of partition (tentatively granted) to April 11, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. No appearances are required.

The court is not aware of any written opposition to the motion for judgment on the pleadings by plaintiff. Plaintiff shall advise the court in writing whether any opposition has been filed no later than March 7, 2025. The parties shall address the question of whether the instant statutory motion for judgment on the pleadings is timely under Code of Civil Procedure section 438(e). The parties may file briefs of no more than three pages regarding the same no later than March 21, 2025.

Pursuant to the agreement of the parties, the court is inclined to appoint Matthew Taylor as referee. No interlocutory judgment shall issue at this time.

CU0000512    eCapital Asset Based Lending v. Nicole Medina, et al.
P21-16971      In the Matter of David Freeman
PR0000069     In the Matter of Tracy Freeman

The court previously issued a tentative ruling regarding defendants’ motion for summary judgment in connection with case No. CU0000512, and continued this matter for hearing at the request of defendants. The parties shall appear for argument.

Plaintiff eCapital Lending’s motion for consolidation is granted. The civil action and the issues in the Freeman probate matters are heavily intertwined, arise from the same set of facts and circumstances, and raise common issues of fact and law. See Code of Civil Procedure § 1048. The civil action shall be the lead file. The case management conference currently set for March 3, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. is continued until March 24, 2025, in Dept. 6. The parties shall meet and confer regarding a proposed trial and pretrial dates for all matters.

CU0000656 Riley Gault vs. Mark Steffen
Appearances are required for hearing. The court intends to grant plaintiff’s counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel. However, the court also needs a status as to whether the settlement remains in place and whether a dismissal of this action is appropriate at this time.

5. CU0001292 Carrie Criss-Harvey vs. Pacific Life Insurance

Demurrer

Defendant’s demurrer to the first amended complaint (FAC) is sustained with leave to amend in part and overruled in part.

The demurrer as to the cause of action for breach of contract is overruled. “In an action based on a written contract, [such as here,] a plaintiff may plead the legal effect of the contract rather than its precise language.” Construction Protective Services, Inc. v. TIG Specialty Ins. Co. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 189, 198–199.

“A person who is not a party to a contract[, such as a beneficiary to an insurance contract,] may … have certain rights thereunder, and may sue to enforce those rights, where the contract is made expressly for her benefit.” Mercury Casualty Co. v. Maloney (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 799, 802; see Civil Code section 1559; Burnett v. Chimney Sweep (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 1057, 1070; Austero v. Nat'l Casualty Co. (1978) 62 Cal. App. 3d 511, 515-16.

The demurrer regarding the cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is overruled. Plaintiff has adequately alleged “the insurer withheld payment of an insured's claim unreasonably and in bad faith.” Love v. Fire Ins. Exchange (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 1136, 1151

The demurrer is sustained regarding the causes of action for fraud and negligent misrepresentation with leave to amend. “The elements of fraud or deceit … are: a representation, usually of fact, which is false, knowledge of its falsity, intent to defraud, justifiable reliance upon the misrepresentation, and damage resulting from that justifiable reliance.” Stansfield v. Starkey (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 59, 72–73. “Every element of the cause of action for fraud must be alleged in the proper manner and the facts constituting the fraud must be alleged with sufficient specificity to allow defendant to understand fully the nature of the charge made.” Id. at 73. At bar, plaintiff has not specifically pled and delineated the precise nature of the purported fraud. Plaintiff must ensure that there are sufficient allegations of fact related to each element as to her claim, and ensure that she carefully delineates facts that relate to plaintiff versus those that relate to decedent.

As to the cause of action for negligence, the demurrer is sustained with leave to amend. Under limited circumstances, an insured or a beneficiary can sometimes pursue a negligence claim against an insurer. See Benavides v. State Farm General Ins. Co. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 1241, 1251. As a general matter, an insurer has a duty “not to unreasonably withhold the payment of benefits due.” Ibid. That said, “the California Supreme Court has identified the limited circumstances where the litigants' relationship, which has its basis in a contract, can give rise to a tort claim.” Ibid. At bar, plaintiff fails to allege sufficient facts to demonstrate the nature of Pacific Life’s duty of care owed to plaintiff directly, separate from any duty to decedent, as well as the remaining elements of breach, harm and causation.

Any amended complaint shall be served and filed within 10 calendar days after service of the signed order after hearing.

Motion for Summary Judgment

Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is continued upon request of defendant.

Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(h) provides: “If it appears from the affidavits submitted in opposition to a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication, or both, that facts essential to justify opposition may exist but cannot, for reasons stated, be presented, the court shall deny the motion, order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or discovery to be had, or make any other order as may be just…”

Here, the court finds that a continuance is appropriate. The motion is premature; the pleadings are not finalized. Furthermore, defendant has asserted that time for discovery is necessary to oppose the motion.

The motion for summary judgment is continued until June 6, 2025, at 10:00 am in Dept. 6. Any opposition and reply shall be filed and served per CCP section 437c, based on the new hearing date.

6. CU18-082824 Samuel Macgregor vs. Charles Elwood Yeager

Cross-Complainant Yeager’s unopposed motion to amend the judgment to correct the APN number of the property at issue is granted as prayed.

February 21, 2025 Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

1. CL21-085997 Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. vs. Kimberlly Keane

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to set aside dismissal and enter judgment pursuant the Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 is granted.

The Code of Civil Procedure provides that if parties to pending litigation stipulate for settlement of the case or a part of the case, the court, on motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. See Code Civ. Proc. § 664.6.

Here, the parties specifically provided in their stipulation and order that the court retain jurisdiction over the settlement. The court has received a declaration stating that the terms of the judgment have been defaulted upon. As such, judgment pursuant to the terms of the stipulation is appropriate.

Judgment is entered against defendant in the amount of $2,336.37.

2. CU0000512 eCapital Asset Based Lending v. Nicole Medina, et al.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

Request for Judicial Notice

Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice filed on January 31, 2025, are granted in their entirety. Exhibits D through M are court documents that are judicially noticeable under Evidence Code section 452(d), which authorizes judicial notice of “[r]ecords of (1) any court of this state or (2) any court of record of the United States and of any state in the United States.”

The court notes, however, that none of the documents needed to be considered as part of the decision noted below.

Standard of Review

The function of a motion for summary judgment or adjudication is to allow a determination as to whether an opposing party cannot show evidentiary support for a pleading or claim and to enable an order of summary dismissal without the need for trial. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843. In analyzing motions for summary judgment, courts must apply a three-step analysis: (1) identify the issues framed by the pleadings to be addressed; (2) determine whether moving party showed facts justifying a judgment in movant's favor; and (3) determine whether the opposing party demonstrated the existence of a triable, material issue of fact. See Sun v. City of Oakland (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 1177, 1182-83; McGarry v. Sax (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 983, 994; Hinesley v. Oakshade Town Center (2005) 135 Cal. App. 4th 289, 294.

Factual Background

Decedent David Freeman passed away on September 7, 2021. His will was admitted to probate on December 17, 2021. It is undisputed that notice of administration was not provided to Plaintiff. Plaintiff eCapital Lending filed their creditor claim against the Estate of David Freeman on July 15, 2022. Defendant Administrator rejected the claim on October 20, 2022. The present creditor action was filed on January 17, 2023.

Statute of Limitations

Defendants seek summary judgment on all claims. They argue: “Plaintiffs filed their lawsuit more than 1 year and four months after David Freeman's death, not within one year of decedent's death as required by Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §366.2, and that Plaintiff cannot demonstrate that the one-year limitation period was tolled for any reason.” The court is not persuaded.

The applicable standard for this matter is set forth in Dobler v. Arluk Medical Center Industrial Group, Inc. (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 530:

The Legislature enacted a comprehensive scheme designed to expedite the administration of estates while providing beneficiaries and administrators some protection from unknown creditor claims.

Probate Code section 9100 provides that a creditor must file a claim in the probate estate proceedings within either four months after the court appoints a general personal representative, or within 60 days after notice of administration is given to the creditor, whichever is later. The short time limitation in section 9100 for filing claims is designed to expedite the distribution of estate assets by requiring creditors to promptly assert their claims against a decedent.

Code of Civil Procedure section 366.2 provides for an outside time limit of one year for filing any type of claim against a decedent. This section provides in pertinent part: “If a person against whom an action may be brought on a liability of the person, whether arising in contract, tort, or otherwise, and whether accrued or not accrued, dies before the expiration of the applicable limitations period, and the cause of action survives, an action may be commenced within one year after the date of death, and the limitations period that would have been applicable does not apply.”

This uniform one-year statute of limitations applies to actions on all claims against the decedent which survive the decedent's death. This limitations period, however, is tolled by [among other things,] (1) the timely filing of a creditor claim [, Prob. Code § 9100] …. Thus, if a claim is timely filed in the probate proceedings, it remains timely filed even though the representative or court acts on a claim by allowing, approving or rejecting the claim outside the limitations period. [Probate Code § 9102; see also § 9352 (a)]. On the other hand, if a claim is not filed in a probate proceeding within either the claims filing period of Probate Code section 9100, or within the one-year limitation period of Code of Civil Procedure section 366.2, a creditor will be forever barred from asserting a claim against the decedent. [Prob. Code § 9253].

Although restrictive, these short limitation periods protect a decedent's heirs, beneficiaries and devisees from unknown and unfiled claims. They also enable the expeditious administration of probate estates.

A properly filed claim in the probate proceeding is crucial for another reason as well. A timely filed claim is a condition precedent to filing an action against a decedent's estate.

In the event the personal representative rejects a creditor's claim, the claim is barred unless the creditor files suit against the decedent's estate within three months after rejection. [Prob. Code § 9353(a)].

Id. at 534-36 (footnotes omitted, italics supplied); see Estate of Holdaway (2019) 40 Cal.App.5th 1049, 1055-56 (rejecting argument that “additional 90-day limitations period does not toll or extend the one-year limitations period provided by Code of Civil Procedure section 366.2;” “Under the current statutory scheme, the filing of a claim tolls the underlying statute of limitations until the creditor's claim has been rejected, and after rejection, ‘ “ the creditor has three months within which to bring an action, regardless of the time otherwise remaining on the statute of limitations.” ’ ” citing Anderson v. Anderson (1995) 41 Cal.App.4th 135, 140.)

In addition, the Probate Code’s claim-filing period “does not run against creditors who were not properly notified to file their claims and who otherwise have no actual knowledge of the administration of the estate.” Cal. Prac. Guide: Probate, ¶ 8:23 (citing Prob. Code, § 9392 Law Rev. Comm’n Comment; Venturi v. Taylor (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 16, 18). In other words, if “notice is not given (and the creditors have no actual knowledge Defendants’ reliance on the case of the administration of the estate), the claim-filing period does not run against them. To hold otherwise would violate due process.” Ibid. (citing Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope (1988) 485 U.S. 478, 491. Thus, to trigger the statute, Defendants must demonstrate that either notice was properly given to the creditor or the creditor had actual knowledge of the administration of the estate.

At bar, David Freeman died on September 7, 2021. Defendants have failed to prove that notice of the probate proceedings was given to plaintiff or that plaintiff had actual notice of the same. Plaintiff filed its creditor claim against the Estate of David Freeman on July 15, 2022, within one year of decedent’s passing. That claim was timely filed in the probate proceedings. Defendant administrator rejected the claim on October 20, 2022. The present creditor action was filed on January 17, 2023, within three months after the rejection. Thus, the action was timely filed under Probate Code section 9353(a) and is not barred by Code of Civil Procedure section 366.2.

The court need not address plaintiff’s other arguments related to judicial estoppel or issue preclusion.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

3. CU0001134 U-Haul Co. of California, et al vs. Clifford Webb, et al

Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production of Documents

Plaintiff’s January 9, 2025 motion to compel defendant Baga’s response to request for production of documents is granted. Plaintiff’s motion for monetary sanctions is granted in part. Defendant is ordered to serve verified responses and responsive documents without objections within ten days of this order and is ordered to pay plaintiff monetary sanctions in the sum of $610.00.

If a party fails to timely serve a response to a demand for production of documents, Code of Civil Procedure Section 2031.300 authorizes the propounding party to move for an order compelling responses. Section 2023.030 gives the court discretion to issue monetary sanctions against a party for its misuse of the discovery process, which includes failing to respond to an authorized method of discovery and failing to meet and confer to resolve a discovery dispute. See Code Civ. Proc. §2023.010(d)(i).

On October 29, 2024, plaintiff served defendant with demand for documents, set one. Defendant has not responded to this authorized discovery request.

While defendant did not oppose plaintiff’s motion, his failure to respond to plaintiff’s demand for production of documents is a misuse of the discovery process that necessitated plaintiff’s motion. See Code Civ. Proc. 2023.010(d)(i). Monetary sanctions are proper, including $60.00 for the filing fee and $550 in attorney’s fees (2.0 hours as the reasonable time to prepare the motion at $275 per hour), for a total award of $610.00.

Motion to Compel Answers to Special Interrogatories

Plaintiff’s January 9, 2025 motion to compel defendant Baga’s responses to special interrogatories is granted. Plaintiff’s motion for monetary sanctions is granted in part. Defendant is ordered to serve verified responses without objections within ten days of this order and is ordered to pay plaintiff monetary sanctions in the sum of $610.00.

If a party fails to timely serve a response to interrogatories, Code of Civil Procedure Section 2030.290 authorizes the propounding party to move for an order compelling responses. Section 2023.030 gives the court discretion to issue monetary sanctions against a party for its misuse of the discovery process, which includes failing to respond to an authorized method of discovery and failing to meet and confer to resolve a discovery dispute. See Code Civ. Proc. §2023.010 (d)(i).

On October 29, 2024, plaintiff served defendant with special interrogatories, set one. Defendant has not responded to this authorized discovery request.

While defendant did not oppose plaintiff’s motion, his failure to respond to plaintiff’s special interrogatories is a misuse of the discovery process that necessitated plaintiff’s motion. See Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2023.010(d) (i), 2023.030. Monetary sanctions are proper, including $60.00 for the filing fee and $550.00 in attorney’s fees (2.0 hours as the reasonable time to prepare the motion at $275.00 per hour), for a total award of $610.00.

Motion to Deem Admissions Admitted

Plaintiff’s January 9, 2025 motion for its requests for admissions to be deemed admitted is conditionally granted, unless defendant Baga provides fully compliant responses prior to the commencement of the hearing. Plaintiff’s motion for monetary sanctions is granted in part in the sum of $610.00.

If a party to whom requests for admissions have been directed fails to serve a timely response, Civil Procedure section 2033.280(b) authorizes the requesting party to move for an order that the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted. Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280(c) states that the court shall make the requested order to deem the admissions admitted unless, before the hearing on the motion, the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served a proposed response that is in substantial compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.220. However, it is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to Requests for Admission necessitated the motion. See Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(c).

On October 29, 2024, plaintiff served defendant with request for admissions, set one. Defendant has not responded to this authorized discovery request.

While defendant did not oppose plaintiff’s motion, his failure to respond to plaintiff’s requests for admissions is grounds for them to be deemed admitted. In addition, monetary sanctions are mandatory and proper, including $60.00 for the filing fee and $550.00 in attorney’s fees (2.0 hours as the reasonable time to prepare the motion at $275 per hour), for a total award of $610.00.

4. CU0001461 In the Matter of Mortgage Lender Services, Inc.

Pursuant to this court’s prior order on November 22, 2024, petitioner Mortgage Lender properly deposited the sum of $240,760.40 with the court. The court now makes the following orders as to such funds.

First, Mortgage Lender Services, as petitioner in this action, is entitled to the sum of $5,740.46 which is on deposit with the court for their fees and costs related to this action. See Civil Code section 2924j(c). Petitioner Mortgage Lender Services, as petitioner in this action, is hereby discharged. Id. The court notes that Mortgage Lender Services is also a claimant to the funds on deposit as a judgment creditor in case CU0000795. Mortgage Lender Services is NOT discharged or dismissed from this action as a claimant to the funds.

Second, Tahoe Donner filed a claim to the funds in the amount of $14,748.63, pursuant to a pre-foreclosure recorded lien. The court finds that Tahoe Donner is a priority lien claimant and is entitled to that money from the amount on deposit with the court. Upon distribution of $14,748.63 to Tahoe Donner, Tahoe Donner shall be dismissed from this action.

Third, claimants Reamer, Clarin, Reamer Pension, Clarin Pension, and Mortgage Lender Services filed a joint claim in this case in the amount of $52,758.56 relating to a judgment against Mark Jones in case CU0000795. However, this judgment is currently on appeal.

Fourth, claimant Sierra Asset filed a claim in this case in the amount of $40,690.00 relating to a judgment against Mark Jones in case CL0001025. However, this judgment is currently on appeal.

Thus, as the two judgments upon which the claims are on appeal, they are not final and this court cannot yet determine the validity or accuracy of the claims. Accordingly, after Mortgage Lender Services as Petitioner in this action is distributed its funds set forth above and is discharged, and after Tahoe Donner is distributed its funds set forth above and is dismissed, then this case is hereby stayed on the court’s own motion pending resolution of both appeals.

All claimants shall file a notice in this case upon completion of both appeals, at which time the matter shall be re-calendared for hearing.

February 14, 2025 Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

CU0000410 Taylor Strunk v. Stagecoach Motel, et al.

The motion by counsel for plaintiffs for relief from an order imposing sanctions against counsel and plaintiffs for $4,120.00, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b), is DENIED.

First, the mandatory provisions under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) based on attorney fault only applies to judgments, dismissals, and defaults. See Huh v. Wang (2007) 158 Cal.App.4th 1406, 1419; Zamora v. Clayborn Contracting Group, Inc. (2002) 28 Cal.4th 249, 254. Thus, the present motion, related to a court order, must be decided under the discretionary standard.

Second, discretionary relief under section 473(b) is not warranted. Section 473(b) states in pertinent part: “The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a … order, … taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” Huh, 158 Cal.App.4th at 1418. “A party seeking discretionary relief on the ground of attorney error must demonstrate that the error was excusable, since the attorney's negligence is imputed to the client.” Id. at 1419. “ ‘The inexcusable neglect of an attorney is usually not a proper basis for granting the client's motion under section 473.’ ” Ibid. “ ‘ “The moving party has a double burden: He must show a satisfactory excuse for his default, and he must show diligence in making the motion after discovery of the default.” ’ ” Id. at 1420.

Here, plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate diligence in timely making the motion for relief. The court entered its original order for sanctions on August 1, 2024. No satisfactory justification has been offered to explain why counsel waited to seek relief from the same until November 22, 2024.

Moreover, plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate any excusable mistake, inadvertence or neglect by counsel in connection with the filing of discovery responses or motion oppositions.

To the extent counsel seeks reconsideration of the August 2024 sanctions order under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008, that request is untimely and unsupported by good cause.

The motion for relief from the sanctions order is DENIED.

CU0000564 Ton Cho Saelee vs. Henry Eddie et al

The motion for summary judgment has been continued by stipulation and order to August 8, 2025, at 10:00 am in Dept. 6.

CU0001501 Zena Hashim vs. Paul Anthony Bernucci

The Court notes that this matter was improperly set for hearing at 9:00 a.m. If oral argument is requested, such argument shall be heard on February 14, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in Dept. 6.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant’s responses to form interrogatories and request for production of documents is GRANTED. Responses and documents, without objections, shall be produced no later than February 24, 2025.

Plaintiff’s motion to deem admissions admitted is DENIED. Responses were served on January 31, 2025 and the motion is moot.

Contrary to the suggestion of the defense, no meet and confer effort was required by plaintiff’s counsel, as no responses were served prior to the filing of the motions. See, e.g., Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 404; Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 906.

Pursuant to Rules of Court, rule 3.1348(a), the court hereby awards plaintiff sanctions in the total amount of $1,870.00 ($1,750.00 for attorneys’ fees (3.5 hours total) plus $120.00 for filing fees), payable by defendant forthwith.

SC0000372 Thomas Deal v. Fred Gerkensmeyer

Plaintiff’s November 13, 2024 motion for reconsideration is DENIED.

“Our small claims system is designed for the speedy final resolution of minor disputes.” ERA-Trotter Girouard Assoc. v. Superior Court (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1851, 1855, citing Eloby v. Superior Court (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 972, 976. “A plaintiff who loses has no right of appeal; a defendant who appears at the hearing and loses has the right to appeal to the superior court.” Ibid. “That “appeal” is one in name only: A small claims appeal is, in fact, a trial de novo in superior court.” Ibid. “At the end of that trial—the second trial of the cause between the litigants—the superior court issues its judgment.” Ibid. “By statute, that judgment is ‘final and not appealable.’ ” Ibid., citing Code. Civ. Proc. § 116.780(a).

“[A] small claims appeal judgment may not be reconsidered on a motion for new trial or a motion to vacate under section 663.” Id. at 1854. “[A] judgment rendered in a superior court on a small claims appeal [also] may not be attacked by a motion to vacate under Code of Civil Procedure section 473.” Id. at 1853 “In short, the legislative mandate that a judgment on a small claims appeal be ‘final and not appealable’… means the judgment is immune from virtually any postjudgment attack.” Id. at 1854.
The Eloby court interpreted the phrase “final and not appealable” to mean that the superior court was without jurisdiction to entertain either a motion for new trial or a motion to vacate judgment filed under section 663.2 [Eloby, 78 Cal.App.3d at 975–976]. The Eloby decision was based not only on the principles of statutory construction but on the general principle that small claims proceedings be both speedy and final. [Id. at 976]. “ ‘[T]he very purpose of the Small Claims Law ... is to make quick and speedy and inexpensive the settlement of disputes, and if all of the normal post-judgment proceedings were to be made available in small claims cases, that would be not only the motion for new trial ..., but ... also there would be the power in the court to vacate the judgment under other sections of the code and there would virtually be no time when either the plaintiff or the defendant would know when the decision was final....’ ” [Ibid.]
ERA-Trotter Girouard Assoc. v. Superior Court (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1851, 1855–1856 (citations modified).

At bar, plaintiff appealed an adverse April 29, 2024 small claims court judgment. Following a trial de novo, Judge La Porte filed a September 26, 2024 written decision. Plaintiff’s first “motion for reconsideration,” filed October 2, 2024, was heard and denied by Judge Anderson. Plaintiff’s “amendment to motion for reconsideration,” filed October 22, 2024, was then heard and denied by Judge LaPorte on November 1, 2024. Before the court is plaintiff’s “motion for reconsideration,” filed November 13, 2024, effectively his third motion for reconsideration of his appeal.

The court has considered the motion in its entirety, the underlying decision of Judge La Porte in September and all motions and proceedings thereafter. The court concludes that it lacks jurisdiction to consider the instant motion. The motion is DENIED.

PR0000497 Estate of Timothy Jordan

Before the court is a petition by Tessa Jordan, the administrator of decedent Timothy Jordan, for determination of entitlement to “estate distribution,” for confirmation of sale of real property by administrator, and for an order “evicting person residing in premises in order to complete sale.” More specifically, petitioner requests the probate court to: confirm a judgment of dissolution from Nevada County Case No. FL 14-011262 between decedent Timothy Jordan and Cassandra Jordan, his former spouse; enforce the sale of real property under that judgment; and evict Ms. Jordan consistent with that judgment. Cassandra Jordan has filed an opposition. The petition is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE on procedural grounds only.

The superior court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction in proceedings for, among other things, dissolution of marriage and division of property. See Fam. Code §§200, 2010; Marriage of Lackey (1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 698, 702. In this court, all family law matters filed in (or transferred to) Nevada City are assigned to the family law department. See Local Rule 5.00. To the extent there is a dispute regarding a party’s noncompliance with a family law order, that is “an issue traditionally and properly within the province of the court which made the order.” Marriage of Lackey, 143 Cal.App.3d at 706. Thus, insofar as petitioner seeks to enforce the judgment of dissolution, the probate court lacks jurisdiction; the family law court has jurisdiction. Petitioner is welcome to file an appropriate motion for relief in the family law action to enforce its judgment and to obtain possession of any property rightfully belonging to decedent and his estate. The administration of any estate assets, including those that may be obtained from enforcement of the family law judgment, will be handled in the instant probate case. =6 proceedings for defendant Wellpath Management, Inc. and/or other defendants. No appearances are required.

These are the Court’s tentative rulings. In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and, thereafter, notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@nccourt.net or by calling (530)362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day prior to the date and time set for hearing. If you do not so notify all other parties and the Court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling of the Court. Any argument is limited to five (5) minutes per party, unless the Court determines additional argument time is needed. See California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Personal appearances are permitted. You may also appear via video by arranging a remote Zoom appearance at the time notice of request for oral argument is made by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

Unless the Court orders otherwise, the Court will not be able to provide court reporters for probate or civil law and motion hearings and does not provide court reporters for case management conferences. Any litigant who wants a record of a law and motion matter or a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense. See Local Rule 10.00.3 B.

FOR ALL LAW AND MOTION MATTERS, UNLESS OTHERWISE ORDERED, THE PREVAILING PARTY SHALL SUBMIT A FORMAL ORDER SETTING OUT VERBATIM THE TENTATIVE RULING ANNOUNCED HEREIN (OR THE ORDER OF THE COURT FOLLOWING ORAL ARGUMENT SHOULD IT DIFFER FROM THE TENTATIVE RULING) IN COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA RULE OF COURT 3.1312 AND SHALL, THEREAFTER, PREPARE, FILE AND SERVE NOTICE OF THE ORDER PURSUANT TO THE RULE OF COURT.

April 4, 2025 Probate Tentative Rulings

P09-14943 In the Matter of SEAN KRULISKY
Appearances are required. On January 31, 2025, conservators were ordered to file a written update with respect to the conservatorship by March 28, 2025. No update has been filed with the court. The conservators shall explain their failure to follow the court’s prior order, as well as whether the conservatorship will continue, transfer to Missouri or terminate.
P11-15177 In the Matter of PHILLIP T KRULISKY
Appearances are required. On January 31, 2025, conservators were ordered to file a written update with respect to the conservatorship by March 28, 2025. No update has been filed with the court. The conservators shall explain their failure to follow the court’s prior order, as well as whether the conservatorship will continue or terminate.
P15-15866 In the Matter of CHRISTIAN VIXIE
No appearances are required. The conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for February 12, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is waived.
PR0000195 In the Matter of ALEKSEI D. DIX
No appearances are required. The conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for April 2, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this annual review is waived.
PR0000425 Estate of HANS J. LILLER
No appearances are required. The petition for final distribution is granted as prayed.
PR0000596 In the Matter of GABRIEL KULP
No appearances are required. The petition for instructions is granted as prayed.
PR0000672 In the Matter of EARLENE TANKERSLEY
Appearances are required. The parties shall be prepared to select dates for hearing on the competing petitions to administer the estate of Earlene Tankersley. Ms. Bond shall immediately give notice to the Attorney General of her petition to administer as it appears to involve a devise for charitable purposes. See Probate Code section 8111. The court notes an error in the February 7, 2025 minutes, which shall be corrected. The court deferred taking action on Ms. Massey’s petition for letters of administration filed on February 7, 2025. Ms. Massey shall confirm whether that petition has been withdrawn in light of the February 19, 2025, petition by Ms. Bond.
PR0000688 In the Matter of JAMES D. BRUMM
Appearances are required. The parties shall be prepared to update the court on the status of mediation and selection of hearing date(s) if necessary.
PR0000719 In the Matter of JEFFREY STEPHENSON
No appearances are required. The court is favorably inclined to grant the petition to appoint successor conservator. However, the court is not in receipt of the court investigator’s report. The court continues this matter to May 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for receipt of report. The clerk shall provide notice to Quest Investigative Services.
PR0000721 In the Matter of BRISAN MICHAEL LEE BANKS
No appearances are required. The petition to administer estate is granted as prayed.
PR0000724 In the Matter of CARTER E. REDDING, JR.
No appearances are required. The petition to administer estate is granted as prayed.
PR0000726 In the Matter of RICHARD SAMUEL BARTHOLOMEW
Appearances are required. There are apparently competing petitions to administer. The court is not in receipt of petitioner Lipski-Mosher’s notice or proof of service (DE-121), proof of publication, or signed duties and liabilities (DE-147). As such, it appears that this petition is incomplete. The parties shall update the court on the current status of their requested petitions and be prepared to set a hearing.

March 28, 2025 Probate Tentative Rulings

P17-16154 In the Matter of Dawn Delange
Appearances are required by conservators and counsel for conservatee. The court has reviewed the March 14, 2025, report of counsel for the conservatee including the report that conservatee has stabilized. The conservatorship of the person shall continue. The court, on its own motion, advances biennial review previously set for January 8, 2027, to January 5, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. Conservators and/or counsel for conservatee shall immediately advise the court if conservatee’s condition deteriorates and further powers are necessary to manage the same. A copy of the minutes shall be served on the court investigator, conservator and counsel for conservatee.
P17-16234 In the Matter of Joseph Ruscica
No appearances are required. The conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservators are acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for February 5, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is waived.

P19-16493 In the Matter of Simon Cruickshank, et al.
No appearances are required. The court approves the seventh accounting and report of the Thelma P. Cruikshank Revocable Trust and all acts of Simon Cruikshank as trustee.

P21-16907 In the Matter of Susan E. Walima
No appearances are required. The conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservators are acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for February 5, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. It appears that the conservatee’s estate has sufficient assets for purposes of the court investigator assessment, which shall be paid by the estate forthwith. A proposed order shall be submitted by the investigator.

PR0000202 In the Matter of Catherine Mendenhall
No appearances are required. The petition for final distribution on approval of account and for payment of administrator and attorney fees is granted as prayed.
PR0000326 In the Matter of Jamie Dickerson
No appearances are required. The court has not received the investigation review report for purposes of annual review. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to May 30, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for receipt of the report. The court notes that an annual accounting is overdue. Conservator Heidi Conservator shall file the same, with appropriate notice and service, within 30 days, for hearing on May 30, 2025. A copy of the minutes shall be served on conservator Heidi Dickerson and the court investigator.
PR0000426 In the Matter of Renee S. Marshall
No appearances are required. The court has not received the investigation review report for purposes of annual review. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to June 6, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for receipt of the report. The court notes that an annual accounting is overdue. Conservator Steven Marshall shall file the same, with appropriate notice and service, within 30 days, for hearing on June 6, 2025. A copy of the minutes shall be served on conservator Steven Marshall and the court investigator.
PR0000439 Estate of Kathleen Alexander

Appearances are required. All powers of trustee Lynn Anthony are suspended except as noted herein. Trustee Anthony is specifically prohibited from taking any action in connection with the disposition of any trust asset or liability. Trustee Anthony shall file and serve the accounting submitted as part of her March 24, 2025, declaration on all required parties along with a notice of hearing. A hearing is now calendared for May 1, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. Petitioner Worth shall file her position regarding the accounting no later than 10 court days prior to the hearing. The February 7, 2025, order to show cause regarding removal of trustee Anthony is continued to May 1, 2025. Trustee Anthony shall file her response to the specific contentions of petitioner Worth in Worth’s March 11, 2024 response to order to show cause no later than 10 court days prior to the hearing.

PR0000614 In the Matter of Nyialong Steve Yang
No appearances are required. The court on its own motion continues this matter to April 18, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Petitioner shall file a signed acknowledgment of duties (DE-147) prior to the continued court date.
PR0000638 In the Matter of William Aguilar
No appearances are required. The court continues this matter to May 23, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to provide the parties additional time to engage in mediation. The parties are ordered to provide a joint status report regarding mediation no later than one week before the next hearing date.
PR0000681 In the Matter of Patricia Melia Paddock
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the petition to administer estate to April 18, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court notes that the proof of service (DE-121) has not been completed. If service was previously effectuated, petitioner shall file proof of the same and give notice of the continued hearing date to all parties. Otherwise, petitioner shall file and serve notice of the hearing for the new date.
PR0000722 Estate of Anthony B. Rohl
No appearances are required. The petition to administer estate is granted as prayed. Letters shall issue.

March 21, 2025 Probate Tentative Rulings

CU0001798 Sheldon Lynn Thompson v. Christina Joy Callahan
No appearances are required. This matter was improvidently set for hearing on March 21, 2025. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued until May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, application for service by publication (if deemed appropriate), or request for dismissal not later than one week before the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
P11-15182 In the Matter of Jacquelyn Munoz
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to May 9, 2025. Conservator shall serve petition, and provide proof of the same, on all parties referenced in the petition pursuant to Prob. Code sections 2352 and 1822.
P12-15334 In the Matter of Helen Powell
No appearances are required. The court has not received a status report from the court investigator or the conservator. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to May 9, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6, for receipt of a report from both the investigator and conservator. A copy of the March 21, 2025 minutes as well as the court’s previous September 20, 2024 minutes shall be provided to the court investigator and conservator.

P15-15875 In the Matter of Sharon Beatty
Appearances are required. The court has reviewed the March 12, 2025 status report of Ms. Greeninger. The parties shall update the court on the status of settlement. In the event no settlement has been reached, parties shall be prepared to inform the court on the legal issues involving the contested income tax return dispute.
P18-16383 In the Matter of Margaret Vinther Copeland Special Needs Trust, et al.
No appearances are required. The petition for settlement of first account/report of trustee is granted as prayed. Additionally, the request to exempt future accountings is granted pursuant to Prob. Code section 2628.
P21-16866 In the Matter of Wilhelm Disselhoff
No appearances are required. The court is in receipt of the notice of death of the conservatee. On its own motion, the court continues the review hearing to May 23, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Conservator is directed to file and serve a final accounting for hearing on the same date.
PR0000069 In the Matter of Tracy Freeman
On the court’s motion, this matter is continued until 10:00 a.m., as part of the regular law and motion calendar.

Nicole Medina and Mitchell Freeman’s unopposed January 28, 2025, motion to intervene in the probate action (PR0000069) is granted. These individuals claim an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and they are so situated that the disposition of the action may impair or impede their ability to protect that interest. See Code of Civil Procedure section 387(d)(1).

Medina and Freeman’s January 28, 2025, motion to expunge lis pendens is granted.

“A lis pendens is a recorded document giving constructive notice that an action has been filed affecting title to or right to possession of the real property described in the notice.” Kirkeby v. Superior Court (2004) 33 Cal.4th 642, 647.

“The Supreme Court outlined the law governing the statutory scheme pertaining to the recording of a lis pendens and the procedure applicable to expunging an improperly recorded notice in Kirkeby v. Superior Court of Orange County (2004) 33 Cal.4th 642, 647[.]” Campbell v. Superior Court (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 904, 911.

“A lis pendens may be filed by any party in an action who asserts a ‘real property claim.’ Code of Civ. Proc. § 405.20. Section 405.4 defines a ‘ “Real property claim” ’ as ‘the cause or causes of action in a pleading which would, if meritorious, affect ... title to, or the right to possession of, specific real property....’ ‘If the pleading filed by the claimant does not properly plead a real property claim, the lis pendens must be expunged upon motion under CCP 405.31.’

“Section 405.30 allows the property owner to remove an improperly recorded lis pendens by bringing a motion to expunge. There are several statutory bases for expungement of a lis pendens, including [that the] claimant's pleadings, on which the lis pendens is based, do not contain a real property claim. See § 405.31. Unlike most other motions, when a motion to expunge is brought, the burden is on the party opposing the motion to show the existence of a real property claim. See § 405.30.”

Id. at 911 (citation, footnotes, quotations and parentheses omitted).

“The Kirkeby court also discussed the law governing a trial court's determination of a motion to expunge under section 405.31 and the standard of review applicable on appeal[.]” Ibid.

“Section 405.31 provides: ‘In proceedings under this chapter, the court shall order the notice expunged if the court finds that the pleading on which the notice is based does not contain a real property claim.’ In making this determination, the court must engage in a demurrer-like analysis. ‘Rather than analyzing whether the pleading states any claim at all, as on a general demurrer, the court must undertake the more limited analysis of whether the pleading states a real property claim.’ Review ‘involves only a review of the adequacy of the pleading and normally should not involve evidence from either side, other than possibly that which may be judicially noticed as on a demurrer.’ Therefore, review of an expungement order under section 405.31 is limited to whether a real property claim has been properly pled by the claimant. ”

Ibid. (citations omitted).

Here, the underlying petition does not contain a real property claim. In summary, the operative petition alleges as follows:

This Petition arises from Nicole [Medina]'s bad-faith and unlawful distribution to herself and to her brother Mitchell [Freeman] an aggregate $1.45 million from their parents' estates without notice or court approval. eCapital had filed two Creditor's Claims against their parents' estates – the respective estates of Tracy Freeman ("Tracy Estate") and David Freeman ("David Estate") (collectively, the "Freeman Estates") relating to a spousal community debt that Tracy incurred during her life when she defaulted under her personal guaranty of the Loan (defined below) from eCapital to Tracy's business Volume Snacks, Inc. ("Volume Snacks"). Rather than restore the $1.45 million pending the resolution of eCapital's Creditor's Claims, Nicole and Mitchell spent the money so distributed, and Nicole (then serving as Personal Representative of the David Estate) baselessly rejected the Creditor's Claim filed in the David Estate. The looting, distribution, and expenditure of $1.45 million was intended as a blatant, bad-faith scheme to hinder and delay eCapital's collection of its Creditor's Claims.

12/5/24 Pet. ¶ 1.

As a result of this alleged misconduct, petitioner requests the court, among other things, for an order:

(1) requiring Nicole and Mitchell to return $1.45 million to the Tracy Estate (or alternatively, the David Estate) under Probate Code section 850, (2) for injunctive relief under Probate Code section 856 prohibiting Nicole and Mitchell from transferring, selling, or encumbering any real or personal property that they have acquired, obtained, or improved with the $1.45 million they received from the Freeman Estates.

Ibid.

Title of Medina and Freeman’s real property is not at issue in the petition. Rather, the petition alleges that Medina/Freeman received funds unlawfully and seeks to enjoin Medina and Freeman from disposing of any real property they have acquired, obtained or improved with those funds. “[A] claim that seeks an interest in real property merely for the purpose of securing a money damage judgment does not support the recording of a lis pendens.” Campbell, 132 Cal.App.4th at 912 (and cases cited therein). Petitioner’s allegations do not affect title or possession of the real property at issue. See Urez Corp. v. Superior Court (1987) 190 Cal.App.3d 1141, 1149; La Paglia v. Superior Court (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 1322, 1325, 1327.

To the extent that a result to the contrary would be possible under either Okuda v. Superior Court (1983) 144 Cal.App.3d 135, 141 (cited by petitioner) or Coppinger v. Superior Court (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 883, 891, the court finds these cases to be unpersuasive and declines to follow them. See Campbell, 132 Cal.App.4th at 918–919. (“We agree with Urez and the cases that follow it that to allow a party to record a lis pendens in a case in which the party seeks only “to freeze the real property as a res from which to satisfy a money judgment” …, is not consistent with the history and purpose of the lis pendens statutes and conclude that the Urez line of cases is more consistent with the history and purpose of the lis pendens statutes than are Coppinger and Okuda.”).

Moreover, Newell v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (2024) 107 Cal.App.5th 728, is readily distinguishable and does not compel a result to the contrary. See Newell, 107 Cal. App. 5th at 737 (“[I]f [trustee] Rollins fails to establish by clear and convincing evidence [decedent] Arthur's donative transfer to her was not the product of fraud or undue influence, the court may remove Rollins as trustee. The court would have to designate a new trustee of the trust, who would then be entitled to hold title to the Van Nuys property in his or her name as successor trustee. In that event, [the instant] petition would change the name of the titleholder.”)(italics added).

In sum, the lis pendens recorded against the parcels of real property for Medina and Freeman are expunged.

There is a split of authority in the state as to whether a claim that seeks an interest in real property merely for the purpose of securing a money damage judgment supports the recording of a lis pendens. See Campbell v. Superior Court, 132 Cal.App.4th at 912 (citing majority and minority positions). The 1992 amendments to the lis pendens statutes took no position regarding this issue and left it to future judicial development. Id. at 915-916. The court finds that petitioner acted with substantial justification in opposing the motion based on a good faith theory supported by existing law, including Okuda, and that it would be unjust to impose an award of attorney’s fees and costs under these circumstances. The court denies Medina and Freeman’s request for attorney’s fees and costs.

PR0000207 In the Matter of Marcia Bauer
Appearances are required by Administrator Morgan Rains regarding petitioner Carol Nimick’s petition for a status report regarding administration of the estate and for an order to show cause regarding why a petition for final distribution should not be filed. Administrator Rains shall be prepared to address questions (a) through (e) of the petition at p. 4, line 24, to p. 5, line, 9. The administrator shall also address the question of when a petition for final distribution shall be filed.
PR0000597 In the Matter of Joshua Christian Chamberlain Special Needs Trust #2
No appearances are required. The court has received the request for dismissal filed by petitioner and trustee; the dismissal has been entered as requested.
PR0000635 In the Matter of Sharri-Anne Renea Adams
Appearances are required by counsel for the conservator and conservatee. The amended petition for appointment of a probate conservator of the person is granted as prayed. Counsel shall confirm that appropriate orders have been lodged in connection with the amended petition.
PR0000659 In the Matter of Ian Fredrick Ayton
Appearances are not required. Conservatorship of the person and estate is granted as prayed. Julie Yates and Janet Mourning shall serve as the conservators. Letters shall issue.
PR0000676 In the Matter of Ralph Berger
No appearances are required. The petition for an order confirming successor trustee and trust assets is granted in part, namely prayers for relief one through four related to the validity of the trust, its amendments and its trustee.

The court denies the fifth request for relief requesting a declaration that the subject property, i.e., 2440 S. Hacienda Boulevard, unit 225, Hacienda Heights, California, is subject to the management and control of the trustee.

“It is well established that if two specific requirements are met, real property may be made part of a trust's assets without a separate deed transferring property to the trust.” Ukkestad v. RBS Asset Finance, Inc. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 156, 160, citing Estate of Heggstad (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 943, 947–950.

“The first requirement is that the owner of real property is the settlor creating the trust with himself or herself as the trustee.” Ibid. That requirement is satisfied here. Decedents/settlors Richard and Bertha Berger were owners of the subject property and created a trust naming themselves as co-trustees.

“Second, because a conveyance of real property is at issue, the other requirement for transferring real property to a trust is compliance with the statute of frauds.” Ibid.. citing Heggstad, 16 Cal.App.4th at 948. “Specifically, the statute of frauds in Probate Code section 15206 states: ‘A trust in relation to real property is not valid unless evidenced ...: [¶] (a) By a written instrument signed by the trustee .... [¶] (b) By a written instrument conveying the trust property signed by the settlor .... [¶] (c) By operation of law.’ ” Id. at 161 (italics added). That requirement is not satisfied here by sufficient, credible evidence. Neither the trust itself (Ex. L to Petition), the description of Berger Trust Property as part of the trust (Ex. M), nor the assignment of deed of trust (Ex. J) expressly convey or reasonably can be construed to convey the subject property itself to the trust. “Although [petitioner’s declaration] related the [settlors’ purported beliefs or] intent that [the subject property] was to be [part of] the trust property, the statute of frauds “forbids the creation of an express trust in real property by verbal declaration of the owner.” Osswald v. Anderson (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 812, 818.

PR0000692 In the Matter of Terry McGowan
No appearances are required. The petition for an order approving modification of trust terms under Prob. Code section 15403 is granted as prayed.
PR0000710 In the Matter of Miller Ernest Harper
No appearances are required. The court notes there is no original will or proof of publication submitted by petitioner. Petitioner shall file the same prior to next hearing date. Additionally, petitioner shall clarify the status of George Sill; specifically, is he the named executor (as suggested by the will) or an alternate executor? On its own motion, the Court continues this matter to May 9, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for further hearing on the petition. Petitioner shall provide notice of the continued court date.
PR0000712 In the Matter of Zane Davis
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to May 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Petitioners shall file a declaration that indicates whether they are seeking full or limited authority to administer under the Independent Administration of Estates Act, question 2.c. of the petition for probate (form DE-111). There is no proof that the petition has been served and that notice of the hearing has been provided as required by Probate Code sections 8100 and 8110. Petitioners shall serve and provide notice to each heir, devisee, executor and alternate executor named in any will as required. Finally, Petitioners shall file an executed duties and liabilities of personal representative (form DE-147). The above referenced items shall be completed no later than one week prior to next court date. Petitioners shall give notice of the continued hearing date to all required parties.
PR0000714 In the Matter of Dylan Melanson
No appearance is required. The court, on its own motion, appoints Katherine Lenore, Esq., to represent conservatee. Additionally, the court is not in receipt of a report from Alta Regional Center as required by Prob. Code section 1827.5 or from Quest Intelligence as required by Prob. Code section 1826. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to May 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6, for receipt of the reports and update from counsel. A copy of the minute order shall be served by the clerk on Alta Regional Center, Quest Intelligence, and counsel for the conservatee.

March 14, 2025 Probate Tentative Rulings

P05-14149 In the Matter of WESLEY B. JAMES
No appearances are required. The public guardian has moved to withdraw its January 6, 2025, petition to appoint a successor conservator. That motion is deemed withdrawn. The order to show cause issued to conservator Linda James related to her December 13, 2024, absence is discharged in the interests of justice. This matter is now set for annual review on November 21, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigator shall prepare, file and serve a report at least 10 court days prior thereto. Counsel for conservatee shall prepare, file and serve a report at least 10 court days prior thereto. A copy of the minutes shall be served upon the court investigator.
P06-14446 In the Matter of KRISTOPHER P. BARLETTA
No appearances are required. The court has reviewed the public guardian’s March 11, 2025, report. Presently, the public guardian does not seek to serve as conservator; the public guardian recommends continuation of the current conservatorship with conservator Quique Barletta. No further action is required at this time with respect to the current conservator. Biennial review is confirmed for March 12, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. A copy of the minutes shall be served upon the court investigator.
P19-16469 In the Matter of ROLAND VIERA
No appearances are required. The court has not received the investigation review report. On its own motion, the court continues this matter for receipt of the report to April 25, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.
P19-16532 In the Matter of SEAN MANCHESTER
Appearance is required regarding the 27 November 2024 first and final report of status of administration; petition to determine distribution rights; and petition to settle estate, accept waiver of accounting, and for final distribution. Petitioner shall be prepared to update the court regarding the status of creditor claim by Verizon Wireless. The court is in receipt of a claim cancellation for creditor Wells Fargo Bank and a claim withdrawal for creditor Capital One Bank.
P20-16664 In the Matter of SANDRA ROBINSON
Appearances are required. Petitioner shall show cause why she should not be sanctioned for failing to file an accounting (for the period from June 1, 2021 to May 31, 2024) by December 15, 2024 as previously ordered by the court on November 11, 2024, and again on December 27, 2024.
P21-16897 In the Matter of MAXWELL JOSIAH CHANDLER
No appearances are required. The conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for March 5, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is waived.
P96-12407 In the Matter of NATALIE ANN NOWAK
No appearances are required. The conservatorship of the person and estate shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment, and management of financial resources. Accountings were previously waived in this matter by court order on April 1, 2016. The next biennial review is set for March 12, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is waived.
PR0000117 In the Matter of CHRISTOPHER HOGUE
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the matter to May 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The conservator shall file and serve an accounting in compliance with California Probate Code sections 1060 through 1062 and section 2620 within the time requirements of the Probate Code prior to the continued review hearing.

PR0000273 In the Matter of BERYL EVELYN DENNIS
No appearances are required. The petition to administer estate is granted as prayed.
PR0000322 In the Matter of ERNESTINE KEHN
No appearances are required. The petition for first and final report of status of administration; petition to determine distribution rights; and petition to settle estate, accept accounting, allow statutory compensation, and for final distribution are granted as prayed.
PR0000367 In the Matter of LEILANI ASONIA HOLLINGSHEAD
Appearances are required. The parties shall update the court regarding the status of settlement efforts and/or the setting of a mediation date.
PR0000453 In the Matter of SUZANNE M. PERRY-MILLER
No appearances are required. The conservatorship of the person and estate shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment, and management of financial resources.

The petition to appoint successor conservator is continued to May 16, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court appoints Katie Lenore, Esq., as counsel for conservatee. The clerk shall provide notice to Ms. Lenore of the continued date.

Additionally, current conservator Leticia Garcia shall file and serve an updated accounting within the required time requirements of the Probate Code prior to the continued court date.

PR0000538 In the Matter of TAMARA CRANWELL
No appearances are required. The court on its own motion continues this matter to May 2, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to permit the Public Guardian additional time to sell the conservatee’s residence. At the next court date, the court requires an update from the Public Guardian on the sale of the conservatee’s residence and its efforts to locate a less restrictive placement in an assisted living community.
PR0000548 In the Matter of KURT EDWARD MEELHEIM
No appearances are required. The December 12, 2024, petition for settlement of first and final account and final distribution and for order fixing and allowing compensation is granted as prayed.
PR0000711 Guardianship of ASHER KEENAN KULP and CONNOR CAMERON KULP

No appearances are required. The court on its own motion continues this matter to May 9, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. A court investigator is appointed and shall provide a report to the court no later than one week prior to the continued court hearing date.

3-7-25 Probate Tentative Rulings

P20-16664 In the Matter of Sandra Robinson
No appearances are authorized. On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to March 14, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. Appearances are required on March 14, 2025. Petitioner shall show cause why she should not be sanctioned for failing to file an accounting (for the period from June 1, 2021 to May 31, 2024) as previously ordered by the court on November 11, 2024 and again on December 27, 2024.
P21-16897 In the Matter of Maxwell Josiah Chandler
No appearances are authorized. On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to March 14, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. On March 14, 2025, no appearances are required. The conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for March 5, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is waived.
PR0000538 In the Matter of Tamara Cranwell
No appearances are authorized. On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to March 14, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. Appearances are required on March 14, 2025. The conservator shall update the court on the sale of the conservatee’s residence and its efforts to locate a less restrictive placement for conservatee in an assisted living community.
PR0000548 In the Matter of Kurt Edward Meelheim
No appearances are authorized. On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to March 14, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. On March 14, 2025, no appearances are required. The December 12, 2024, petition for settlement of first and final account and final distribution and for order fixing and allowing compensation is granted as prayed.

2-28-25 Probate Tentative Rulings

P01-13326 In the Matter of Wilfred Martinez
No appearances are required. The petition for first account and report of conservator of the estate is granted as prayed.
P17-16181 In the Matter of Andrew Joseph Graybill
Appearances are required. The conservatee resides in Yuba County. No petition to transfer the conservatorship has been filed with the court. Petitioner shall show cause why venue in this county is in the best interests of conservatee, as previously required by the court’s prior ruling on January 17, 2025.
P22-16995 In the Matter of Phyllis Graham
No appearances are required. The court is in receipt of the notice of death of the conservatee. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to April 11, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Conservator is directed to file and serve a final accounting.
PR0000069 In the Matter of Tracy Freeman
This matter will be heard at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, February 28, 2025, along with related cases CU0000512 and P21-16971.
PR0000356 In the Matter of Bailey Faith Hoskin
No appearance is required. The conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for March 5, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is due forthwith.
PR0000431 In the Matter of Constantin Bozidarov Popov
No appearances are required. The request for extraordinary attorney fees is granted as prayed.
PR0000565 In the Matter of Rhonda Myers
No appearances are required. The petition to approve report of administrator on waiver of accounting and its settlement, allow statutory and attorney compensation, approve final distribution of the estate and approve discharge of administrator is granted as prayed.
PR0000634 Estate of Alan Bernard
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the spousal support petition to April 11, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Petitioner has filed proof of service, but the proof of service is defective in that it does not list on whom the documents were served. Additionally, the notice of hearing (DE-120) does not indicate how the mailing was effectuated. See § 3. Petitioner shall give notice of the continued hearing and ensure that the petition, proposed order and a notice of hearing are served on all required parties and that an appropriate proof of service is filed to establish the same.
PR0000635 In the Matter of Sharri-Anne Renea Adams
No appearance is required. The court notes the initial petition in this matter seeks a limited conservatorship of the person. The court, on its own motion, appoints Richard Keene, Esq., to represent conservatee. Additionally, the court is not in receipt of a report from Alta Regional center required pursuant to Probate Code section 416.8. On its own motion the court continues this matter to April 11, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6, for receipt of the report and update from counsel. A copy of the minute order shall be served on Alta Regional center by the clerk as well as counsel for the conservatee.
PR0000645 In the Matter of Walter Mari Ingram
No appearance is required. The petition for orders accepting transfer is granted as prayed. The conservatorship still appears warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. A hearing on the first annual review is set for February 27, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.
PR0000655 In the Matter of Willah Brave Barlow Dunwody
Appearances are required. Petitioner William Dunwody shall update the court on the status of the final distribution from Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. 22STPB11927 as well as proof that a court-blocked blocked account has been opened.
PR000657 In the Matter of Cottell Family Trust
No appearances are required. The petition to confirm trust assets is granted as prayed.
PR0000666 In the Matter of Brian Rasmus
No appearances are required. The petition to administer estate is granted as prayed.
PR0000690 In the Matter of Fred Dean-Turner
No appearances are required. The court continues this matter, on its own motion, to April 11, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6, for receipt of the medical capacity declaration. Petitioner shall give notice of the continued hearing date.

2-21-25 Probate Tentative Rulings

P15-15822 In the Matter of MARY LOVE
No appearances are required. The petition for final distribution on approval of account and for payment of attorney fees is granted as prayed.
P94-11981 In the Matter of ZACHARY SKAGGS
Appearances are required. The request to remove co-conservator, Miriam Skaggs, and replace with co-conservator, Jason Skaggs, is granted as prayed. The petition to change venue to Santa Barbara is granted as prayed. Conservatee resides in Santa Barbara; venue is appropriate in that county. The clerk is directed to transfer all required case documents to the Santa Barbara Superior Court. Petitioner shall ensure that appropriate orders after hearing are presented. See Probate Code § 2201(a)).
PR0000495 In the Matter of DAVID GRIFFIS
No appearances are required. The petition is denied without prejudice. The court made a January 10, 2025 order specifying a number of defects requiring correction. Petitioner has still failed to provide: form DE-300; an amended petition with Box 9a(1) or (2) checked, Box 9a(3) or (4) checked; and all the information required in question 14 set forth on an Attachment 14, including the relationships of individuals to the decedent.
PR0000598 Estate of HELEN JAMES MCDONALD
Appearances are required. Parties shall provide the status of the proposed stipulation and/or settlement.

February 14, 2025 Probate Tentative Rulings

CU0000836 LEANNE PRICE vs. JAMES KITCHEN, et al.
This tentative ruling is by Judge Picquet. No appearances are required. This case is dismissed without prejudice in light of the notice of settlement.

P15-15866 In the Matter of CHRISTIAN VIXIE
No appearances are required. The court has not received the investigation review report. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to April 4, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for receipt of the report.

P97-12637 In the Matter of MELINDA WILSON
No appearances are required. The review hearing is dropped. The court is in receipt of the acceptance of transfer to Butte County.

PR0000053 In the Matter of MILDRED KITCHEN
This tentative ruling is by Judge Picquet. No appearances are required. This case is dismissed without prejudice in light of the notice of settlement.

PR0000637 In the Matter of LEILANI ASONIA HOLLINGSHEAD
No appearances are required. This matter has been continued by stipulation and order.

PR0000500 In the Matter of CHARLES WHITTLESEY
No appearances are required. The petition for final distribution on waiver of account is granted as prayed.

PR0000605 In the Matter of INESIS JANIS ALBERTS DAY
No appearances are required. The petition to administer estate is granted as prayed.

PR0000686 In the Matter of WILLIAM ARTHUR RISKE, JR.
No appearances are required. The petition to administer estate is granted as prayed.

2-7-25 Probate Tentative Rulings

P14-15643 In the Matter of CHRISTOPHER HOWIE
No appearances are required. The fourth account and report of conservator, petition for allowance of fees to attorney for conservator and reimbursement for court ordered attorney fees are granted as prayed. Conservatee’s petition for substituted judgment shall be filed within 30 days and noticed for hearing no later than May. The conservatorship remains in full force and effect until ordered otherwise.
P17-16154 In the Matter of DAWN DELANGE
No appearances are required. On the request of attorney for conservatee, Ms. Lenore, this matter is continued to March 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to allow additional time for counsel to speak with her client.
P17-16234 In the Matter of JOSEPH RUSCICA
No appearances are required. The court has not received the investigation review report. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to March 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for receipt of the report.
P21-16907 In the Matter of SUSAN WALIMA
No appearances are required. The court has not received the investigation review report. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to March 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for receipt of the report.
PR0000202 In the Matter of CATHERINE MENDENHALL
No appearances are required. The court is in receipt of creditor claims for AT&T Uverse and USAA Savings bank, both filed April 11, 2023, which are not addressed in the petition. On its own motion, the Court continues this matter to March 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for further hearing on petition for final distribution on approval of account, and for payment of administrator and attorney fees. An update regarding these claims shall be filed no later than 10 court days prior thereto.
PR0000326 In the Matter of JAMIE DICKERSON
No appearances are required. The court has not received the investigation review report. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to March 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for receipt of the report.
PR0000426 In the Matter of RENEE MARSHALL
No appearances are required. The court has not received the investigation review report. On its own motion, the court continues this matter to March 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for receipt of the report. The court notes a first accounting is due and not yet filed. An accounting shall be filed no later than 30 days from now and noticed for hearing no later than May.
PR0000439 ESTATE OF KATHLEEN ALEXANDER
No appearances are required. On the court’s own motion, an Order to Show Cause regarding removal of trustee subject to a surcharge and appointment of Laura Worth as successor trustee shall be set for March 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The parties shall file their positions regarding the same no later than 10 court days prior thereto.
PR0000443 In the Matter of ELIZABETH ARMBRUSTER
No appearances are required. The petition for final distribution on waiver of account and for payment of attorney fees is granted as prayed.
PR0000475 In the Matter of MICHAEL BOND
Appearances are required for hearing by Counsel for Mr. Quentmeyer, Stephanie Deathriage and Mr. Workman. The court intends to allow an examination to occur to determine if the two named individuals are in possession of assets of the decedent.
PR0000481 In the Matter of SALVATORE ALBERTI
No appearances are required. The matter has settled and the hearing is dropped from calendar.
PR0000556 In the Matter of MICHAEL MURDOCK
No appearances are required. The petition for final distribution on waiver of account is granted as prayed.
PR0000580 In the Matter of CHRISTOPHER LEVAS
Appearances are required. An update regarding the status of mediation is required. Alternatively, the parties shall meet and confer, identify all issues requiring an evidentiary hearing, and be prepared to set a hearing date for the same.
PR0000630 In the Matter of GARY BOULERICE TRUST
No appearances are required. The petition for approval of fourth account and fifth account and petition for approval of fees to trustee and attorney are granted as prayed.

PR0000672 In the Matter of EARLENE TANKERSLEY
No appearances are required. Gabrielle Massey, a potential beneficiary under the alleged will, and Tiffanie Bond, a potential executor under the alleged will, have filed no objections to the petition to administer the estate or know independent petition. Therefore, the November 22, 2024 petition to administer estate is granted as prayed. The court has not been made aware of any evidence of a subscribing witness or other proof that the alleged will, in fact, is decedent’s will. See Probate Code §§ 8220, 8222.
PR0000673 In the Matter of JUDITHE MELTON
No appearances are required. The court grants the petition to administer the estate as prayed.

PR0000681 In the Matter of PATRICIA PADDOCK
No appearances are required. The court notes there is no list of trust beneficiaries, original will or proof of publication submitted by petitioner. Petitioner shall file same prior to next hearing date. On its own motion, the Court continues this matter to March 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for further hearing on the petition.

PR0000685 In the Matter of JULIE MILLER
No appearances are required. Petitioner seeks to inspect/receive a sealed birth record of an adopted person under Health and Safety Code section 102705. The petition is denied without prejudice. Under section 102705, “All records and information … shall be available only upon the order of the superior court of the county of residence of the adopted child or the superior court of the county granting the order of adoption.” (Italics supplied). Paragraph 2 of the petition is not filled out and the court is unable to determine whether the adoption occurred in Nevada County. Moreover, petitioner does not reside in this county. Petitioner may refile an amended petition in this county if, indeed, the adoption occurred here.
PR0000688 In the Matter of JAMES BRUMM
Appearances are required in connection with the petition to confirm actions and for settlement of the account. The parties shall meet and confer, identify all issues requiring an evidentiary hearing, and be prepared to set a hearing date for the same.

January 31, 2025 Dept. 6 Probate Law and Motion Tentative Rulings

1. P08-14754 In the Matter of MAGGIE ECHTERNACHT

On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m. Appearances are required. Conservatee Maggie Echternacht resides in Yuba County and venue for the conservatorship appears appropriate in that county. Conservators Arthur and Leah Echternacht were previously directed to either file a petition to transfer the conservatorship to Yuba County pursuant to Probate Code section 2211, or alternatively, show cause why venue in this county is in the best interests of the conservatee. No petition has been filed. Conservators shall update the court on the status of the above. In addition, conservators failed to appear at the December 20, 2024 hearing and should show cause why they should not be sanctioned. It appears that mail notice of the December hearing was returned to the court, but it is unclear whether notice was received by email.

2. P09-14943 In the Matter of SEAN KRULISKY

On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m. Appearances are required by both conservators Annette Lienhart and Vincent Krulisky. Conservator Annette Lienhart is ordered to show cause why she should not be sanctioned for failure to appear on July 19, 2024, and November 22, 2024. She is also ordered to show cause she should not be sanctioned for relocating the conservatee to Missouri without permission of the court. Both conservators shall be prepared to address why conservators should not transfer the conservatorship to Missouri.

3. P11-15177 In the Matter of PHILLIP KRULISKY

On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m. Appearances are required by both conservators Annette Lienhart and Vincent Krulisky, as well as conservatee Phillip Krulisky. Conservator Annette Lienhart is ordered to show cause why she should not be sanctioned for failure to appear on July 19, 2024, and November 22, 2024. The court investigator suggested in a July 2024 report that the conservatorship is now unnecessary. The conservators and conservatee shall be prepared to discuss the same. If a conservatorship is no longer required, conservators shall file an appropriate motion for termination of the conservatorship.

4. P14-15643 In the Matter of CHRISTOPHER JOSHUA HOWIE

No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the hearing is continued until February 7, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. Petitioner/conservator’s January 3, 2025 fourth account has been set for hearing on February 7, 2025. Mr. Keene, counsel for conservatee, previously indicated that he would endeavor to file a recommendation regarding a potential replacement conservator, proper venue and other potential estate management options. No recommendation has presently been received.

If any party wishes to be heard regarding the noted continuance, they should appear on January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m.

5. PR0000069 In the Matter of TRACY FREEMAN

No appearances are required. E Capital Asset Based Lending Corp., personal representative for the estate, filed a December 5, 2024 petition for orders requiring the return of $1.45 million in personal property belonging to the estate from Nicole Medina and Mitchell Freeman. The petition is continued until February 28, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. (the hearing date for the pending motion for consolidation of this case with case nos. CU0000512 and P21-16971, and for a pending motion for summary judgment in the -512 case.)

The court notes that no response to the December petition seemingly has been filed by Ms. Medina and Mr. Freeman. Medina and Freeman shall advise the court regarding the same no later than February 7, 2024.

A December 12, 2024 notice of pendency of action (lis pendens) has been recorded. Medina and Freeman filed a January 8, 2025 motion to intervene, expunge lis pendens and for attorney fees. Based on the January 24, 2025 request of the moving parties, that motion is removed from calendar.

If any party wishes to be heard regarding the noted continuance, they should appear on January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m.

6. PR0000563 In the Matter of BEATRICE ANNE SONKE

No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m. Petitioner Les McMurry’s December 20, 2024, first and final report of conservator of person and estate without account, petition for approval and petition for allowance of conservator’s fees and attorney’s fees, and petition for discharge of conservator requires limited clarification regarding fees. The body of the complaint references attorney’s fees of $2,047.50. Claimed costs are $356.60. Thus, it appears that fees and costs equal $2,404.10 (not $2,386.10 as indicated in the prayer). In addition, the conservator suggests that he worked 21 hours. McMurry Decl. at 2:14. This appears to be a potential error given conservator’s representation that he provided hospice care for about 12 hours per day from approximately June 11 to July 2, 2024. Appropriate declarations should be presented regarding the same if possible. The court is otherwise inclined to grant the relief requested.

7. PR0000579 In the Matter of BEATRICE ANNE SONKE

On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m. Petitioner Les McMurry’s December 23, 2024 petition for settlement of first and final account and final distribution on waiver of account and for order fixing and allowing statutory compensation appears to have merit. That said, the court needs counsel to confirm that the $6,300.00 conservator compensation and the $13,973.03 attorney fees (which includes fees from the conservatorship) are accurate given the concerns noted in case no. PR0000563.

8. PR0000581 In the Matter of JANET MEHR

On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m. No appearances are required. In a January 28, 2025 declaration, counsel for petitioner Janet Mehr, individually and as trustee of the Carl T. and Janet L. Mehr Trust, indicates that, based on documentation received from successor trustee Steven Mehr, petitioner is satisfied that all funds from the now-invalidated irrevocable trust have been transferred back to the revocable trust, and that the successor trustee has complied with the court’s October 25, 2024 order. The court so finds and concludes. There do not appear to be any other unresolved issues as to the petition. Absent any objection, this matter shall be closed by the clerk.

9. PR0000598 Estate of HELEN JAMES MCDONALD

On the court’s motion, this matter is continued to January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m. Appearances are required regarding the opposed August 14, 2024 petition to administer estate by petitioner Barbara Travis. The parties shall advise the court regarding potential mediation and/or what issues, if any, require an evidentiary hearing, time estimates and the earliest date for scheduling any evidentiary hearing.

There is still no proof that the September 13, 2024 Maya Fuller declaration has been served on Karen Arhns, alternate co-executor of decedent’s will. Ms. Fuller shall serve the same and/or file a proof of service by February 7, 2024.

No proof of service on all parties has been filed regarding the September 17, 2024 and November 14, 2024 James Parnell first and second oppositions. Mr. Parnell shall serve the same and/or file a proof of service by February 7, 2024.

10. PR0000614 Estate of NYIALONG STEVE YANG

Appearances are not required. The December 9, 2024 petition by Choua Yang to administer the estate of Nyialong Steve Yang is continued on the court’s motion until March 28, 2024, at 9:00 a.m.

The petition has a series of defects. Petitioner must file file an amended petition that addresses the following items on the petition: 2.a. Is there a will? 2.d. Is bond required; if not, why? 3.e. Questions regarding bond. 8. All required information including relationships of Choua Yang, etc. In addition, petitioner must: file a notice of hearing, serve notice of the hearing on all individuals required, publish notice of the hearing and file proof of the publication.

If petitioner needs access to legal resources in connection with these issues, she can contact the court’s Self Help Center.

If any party wishes to be heard regarding the noted continuance, they should appear on January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m.

11. PR0000676 In the Matter of RALPH BERGER

No appearances are required. The December 17, 2024 petition for an order confirming successor trustee and trust assets is continued on the court’s motion until March 21, 2024, at 9:00 a.m.

In ¶ 26, of the petition, petitioner states: “Petitioner believes that the Property herein was subject to the authority and control of the co trustees pursuant to the Schedule of Trust Assets attached to the Trust as part of the declaration of trust, and under language of both the Trust, and the Third Amendment to the Trust which listed those properties as specific gifts.” No later than March 7, 2025, petitioner shall file a supplemental brief of no more than two (2) pages, with citations to the particular instruments by page, paragraph and/or line, and explain, in greater detail, what precise information in these instruments support the relief sought.

If any party wishes to be heard regarding the noted continuance, they should appear on January 31, 2025, at 2:30 p.m.

January 24, 2025 Dept. 6 Probate Law and Motion Tentative Rulings

P07-14596 In the Matter of Guadalupe Valderama

No appearance is required. The limited conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for January 8, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is waived.

P19-16532 In the Matter of Sean Manchester

Appearance is required regarding the 27 November 2024 first and final report of status of administration; petition to determine distribution rights; and petition to settle estate, accept waiver of accounting, and for final distribution. Petitioner shall be prepared to update the court regarding the status of creditor claims by Verizon Wireless, Capital One Bank, and Wells Fargo Bank. (Counsel previously indicated that he had to do research on the Capital One Bank's claim, which was never received; counsel believed that Wells Fargo Bank and Verizon's claims had been resolved.)

P21-16593 In the Matter of Norman W. Koeckritz

The 24 December 2024 first and final account and report of administrator, petition for its settlement, for allowance of statutory compensation, for reimbursement of costs, and for final distribution is granted as prayed.

P87-10497 In the Matter of Eric Neher

Appearance by the conservator is required. Conservator shall confirm his willingness and ability to continue his service. If for any reason conservator feels he lacks the ability to continue service, the court will need to know whether a petition for appointment of a successor conservator will be filed.

The previous 13 December 2024 order to issue an order to show cause for conservator in connection with his absence that day is vacated. Conservator shall explain why he was absent from court on 13 December 2024. The court is in receipt of conservator’s notice of change of address.

The court is in receipt of conservator’s accounting. At the hearing on 16 April 2021, the court ordered that future accountings are waived.

PR0000360 In the Matter of Spencer Logan Edward Morris

The 6 December 2024 amended first account of guardians and petition for its settlement is granted. Guardianship shall continue. An annual review hearing is set for January 16, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.

PR0000407 In the Matter of Conservatorship of Mattie Sommers

The 6 November 2024 first account and report of conservator of the person and estate and petition for fees for conservator and her attorney are granted as prayed.

PR0000548 In the Matter of Kurt Edward Meelheim

No appearance is required. On its own motion, the court continues the 12 December 2024 petition for settlement of first and final account and final distribution and for order fixing and allowing compensation to March 7, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Petitioner shall submit a declaration and supporting documentation clarifying the following deficiencies: 1. The period of the accounting, 2. Most recent statement for Merrill account; and 3. The potential discrepancy between the property on hand at 8:11 of the petition ($62,963.22) and estate balance in possession of petitioner ($243,408.44) at 6:13 of the petition.

PR0000634 In the Matter of Alan Bernard

No appearance is required. On petitioner’s motion, the court continued the spousal property petition to February 28, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Petitioner has not filed corrected proofs of service as previously ordered. Petitioner shall ensure that the petition, proposed order and notice of continued hearing are served on all required parties and that an appropriate proof of service is filed to establish the same. If these documents are not filed at least one week before the continued hearing date, the petition will be subject to dismissal.

PR0000635 In the Matter of Sharri-Anne Renea Adams

No appearance is required. On its own motion, the court further continues the petition for appointment of probate conservator of the person to February 28, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court must still receive the court investigator’s report and orders that it be filed not later than one week before the continued hearing. Petitioner shall serve notice of the continued hearing and file a signed proof of service of citation prior to the continued hearing date. The temporary conservatorship and letters in connection therewith are extended through March 3, 2025.

PR0000645 In the Matter of Walter Mari Ingram

No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court further continues the petition for order accepting transfer to February 28, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Petitioner has not filed the certified copy of the other state order or proof of service as previously ordered. If these documents are not filed at least one week before the continued hearing date, the petition will be subject to dismissal.

PR0000659 In the Matter of Ian Fredrick Ayton

Appearances are required for trial setting. The court has not received a written update as previously requested from conservatee.

PR0000668 In the Matter of Sage Marie Davis Da Rosa

The petition for appointment of guardian of minor’s estate is granted as prayed. Petitioner shall deposit estate funds in an interest-bearing, federally insured blocked account. No funds may be withdrawn from this account without a court order.

A review hearing is scheduled for December 6, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Petitioner shall submit proof of deposit of the estate assets at least one week before the review hearing.

PR0000672 In the Matter of Earlene Tankersley

The 22 November 2024 petition to administer estate is granted as prayed. The court is cognizant of the declaration of the Chief Deputy Public Administrator regarding the existence of an alleged 22 March 2022 will. Based on its review of the 23 December 2024 declaration of the Deputy Public Administrator (DPA), the court is satisfied that the petition has been personally served on Gabrielle Massy, a potential beneficiary under the alleged March 2022 will. Based on the representation of the DPA during the hearing on 13 December 2024, the court is satisfied that the petition has been served by mail on Tiffanie Bond, a potential executor under the alleged will, and who appeared at the 27 December 2024 hearing. No objection has been filed by Ms. Massy or Ms. Bond to the instant petition or request by either for any action in connection with the alleged will. The court has not been made aware of any evidence of a subscribing witness or other proof that the alleged will, in fact, is decedent’s will. See Probate Code sections 8220-8222.

January 17, 2025 Dept. 6 Probate Law and Motion Tentative Rulings

1. P01-13326 In the Matter of Wilfred Martinez

No appearance is required. On its own motion, the court further continues the first account and report of conservator of the estate to February 28, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Petitioner was previously ordered to supplement the account with the following information one week before the hearing: Amount of attorney’s fees sought as discussed in paragraph 18, account number for the high-yield savings account noted in paragraph 8, amended inventory and appraisal to account for recently discovered oil lease as noted in paragraph 9, and updated statements for Wells Fargo and Bank of America accounts as noted in paragraph 10. Petitioner filed an untimely update.

2. P05-14149 In the Matter of Wesley B. James

No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the petition for removal of conservator to March 14, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court is in receipt of the January 6, 2025 petition for removal of conservator. The court notes that this petition was filed less than fifteen days before the hearing date. The Public Guardian shall notice the petition and supporting documents for the new date.

The court continues the petition to appoint successor conservator to the same date. The court has not received an actual petition but appears to have received related documents such as the notice and a proposed order; these latter documents were filed and served less than fifteen days before the hearing. The Public Guardian shall file and serve the petition and supporting documents for the new date.

On its own motion, the court continues the order to show cause for conservator Linda James to March 14, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The conservator shall show cause why she should not be sanctioned for her absence on December 13, 2024.

3. P10-15020 In the Matter of Katelynn C. Hengesbach

No appearance is required. The limited conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next biennial review is set for January 15, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is waived.

4. P17-16181 In the Matter of Andrew Joseph Graybill

No appearance is required. The limited conservatorship of the person and estate is to continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement, quality of care, including physical and mental treatment, and finances. The next biennial review is set for November 13, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. The court investigator assessment fee is waived.

The conservatee resides in Yuba County. Petitioner shall petition to transfer the conservatorship to Yuba County pursuant to Probate Code § 2211, or alternatively, show cause why venue in this county is in the best interests of the conservatee. A review hearing is set for February 28, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6, at which time petitioner shall update the court on the status of its petition to transfer or show cause.

5. PR0000389 In the Matter of Angelina Starnes

No appearance is required. The limited conservatorship of the person shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. The next annual review is set for January 15, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review is waived.

6. PR0000407 In the Matter of Conservatorship of Mattie Sommers

No appearance is required. The conservatorship of the person and estate shall continue. The conservatorship still appears to be warranted. The conservator is acting in the best interests of the conservatee regarding the conservatee's placement and quality of care, including physical and mental treatment. A hearing on the first accounting is set for January 24, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The next biennial review is set for January 15, 2027, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court investigation fee for this biennial review shall be paid forthwith.

7. PR0000422 In the Matter of Terry Drake

No appearance is required. The October 17, 2024 petition for final distribution, waiver of accounting, payment of statutory/extraordinary attorney’s fees is granted as prayed with the exception of extraordinary fees. No showing of cause has been established pursuant to California Rule of Court 7.702.

8. PR0000623 In the Matter of Susan Lesley Vega

The 13 September 2024 petition to administer estate is granted as prayed.

Probate Code §6110 provide in pertinent part:

(c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the will shall be witnessed

by being signed, during the testator's lifetime, by at least two persons

each of whom (A) being present at the same time, witnessed either the

signing of the will or the testator's acknowledgment of the signature or

of the will and (B) understand that the instrument they sign is the testator's

will.

(2) If a will was not executed in compliance with paragraph (1), the will

shall be treated as if it was executed in compliance with that paragraph if

the proponent of the will establishes by clear and convincing evidence that,

at the time the testator signed the will, the testator intended the will to

constitute the testator's will.

Probate Code §6111.5 provides:

Extrinsic evidence is admissible to determine whether a document constitutes

a will pursuant to Section 6110 or 6111, or to determine the meaning of a will

or a portion of a will if the meaning is unclear.

Petitioner has submitted declarations of decedent’s daughters, son-in-law, and the notary who witnessed her signature on other legal documents to support the validity of decedent’s will. The family members also assert that decedent informed them of her testamentary intentions during her lifetime. This extrinsic evidence establishes, by clear and convincing evidence, that the document presented as decedent’s will does constitute her will.

9. PR0000625 In Re Steel, Lily Jean

Appearance is required. Petitioner shall inform the court of the status of her deposit of estate assets into a blocked account as previously ordered and filing proof of the same.

10. PR0000642 In the Matter of Shauna Geary

On the court’s motion, this matter is continued until March 14, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. The parties submitted a joint statement regarding their inability to resolve the matter, issues that will require court adjudication and a potential amended petition. Petitioner shall file any amended petition by no later than January 31; respondent shall file a response no later than February 28. The parties shall meet and confer regarding the order issues shall be resolved, which issues can be resolved together, time estimates for the same, and the earliest date a hearing can be set. A joint report shall be filed no later than one week prior to the next hearing.

These are the Court’s tentative rulings. In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and, thereafter, notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@nccourt.net or by calling (530)362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day prior to the date and time set for hearing. If you do not so notify all other parties and the Court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling of the Court. See California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Personal appearances are permitted. You may also appear via video by arranging a remote Zoom appearance at the time notice of request for oral argument is made by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net

Unless the Court orders otherwise, the Court does not provide court reporters for case management conferences. Any litigant who wants a record of a case management conference must arrange for the presence of a court reporter at his or her expense. See Local Rule 10.00.3 B.

April 7, 2025 Case Management Conference Tentative Rulings

CL0002141 Discover Bank vs. Sequoia Nicholas
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CL0002373 Discover Bank vs. Patrick Weger
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CU0000191 David Elliott, et al. v. Ellen Nevarez, et al.
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CU0000634 Carla Marie Vieira vs. Cal. Department of Transportation, et al.
Appearances are required. This case appears at issue. Counsel shall update the court as to the same and be prepared to discuss trial dates.
CU0000991 Christopher Stormbringer v. Turning Point
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to June 2, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to permit pending motions to be adjudicated.
CU0001162 Miles Hagood vs. Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc.
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CU0001189 Corina Loving-Mills, et al. vs. Abby Eidson
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CU0001270 Marin Martin vs. Crystal Kanada, et al.
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CU0001308 Cephren Jennemann vs. Gro-Tech Systems, Inc., et al.
Appearances are required. Plaintiff shall show cause for failure to file proof of service, an application for service by publication, or a request for dismissal of Defendant Gro-Tech Systems, Inc., as previously ordered. Additionally, counsel shall show cause for failing to appear on February 24, 2025. Finally, no parties have filed case management conference statements are required.
CU0001320 Sara Bowling vs. Caseproof, LLC, et al.
Appearances are required. The parties shall be prepared to update the court on the status of settlement.
CU0001347 Patricia Kukucka, et al. vs. Grass Valley S H, LLC, et al.
No appearances are required. The court on its own motion continues the case management conference to October 6, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to provide sufficient time for the parties to complete arbitration.
CU0001354 Cynthia Gustafson vs. Safeway Inc., et al.
No appearance is required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to June 9, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 and sets an order to show cause hearing on the same date and time. Plaintiff shall show cause why she should not be sanctioned for failing effectuate service on Store Manager, Doe 1.
CU0001577 Public Risk Innov. Solutions and Mgt. vs. Sammies Friends Inc.
No appearances are required. This case is at issue.

Trial is hereby set as follows: 5-day jury trial.

Trial: January 27, 2026, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

PTC: January 9, 2026, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6

MSC: December 29, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

CU0001813 USA Bath California Remodeling, Inc. vs. David Sweat
No appearances are required. This case is at issue.

Trial is hereby set as follows: 5-day jury trial.

Trial: January 27, 2026, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

PTC: January 9, 2026, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6

MSC: December 29, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

CU21-085797 Koslin and Koslin Construction, Inc. vs. GV Development LLC
Appearances are required. The parties shall be prepared to update the court on the status of dismissal.
P89-10877 In the Matter of Thomas Michael Odom
No appearances are required. This matter was incorrectly calendared. The court continues this matter to May 2, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.
PR0000642 In the Matter of Shauna Geary
No appearances are required. The court has signed the stipulation and order. This matter is off calendar.
PR0000664 In the Matter of the Dennis W. Babson 2000 Trust
Appearances are required. The parties shall be prepared to update the court on the status of dismissal.

April 1, 2025 Case Management Conference Tentative Rulings

CU0000284 Tod DuBois v Scott Fetty, et al.
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to permit pending motions to be adjudicated.
CU0001613 Judith and Coleman Bowman v. Town of Truckee
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to permit pending motions to be adjudicated.
CU0000656 Riley Gault vs. Mark Steffen
Appearances are required. The parties submitted an October 18, 2024, notice of settlement in this matter. The court needs the parties to verify whether this case has settled. The court is inclined to set another case management conference on May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6, to permit plaintiff’s counsel sufficient time to serve the order relieving counsel on plaintiff at his current reported address in Colorado.

March 24, 2025 Case Management Conference Tentative Rulings

CL0000572 Gerry Reis v. Roger Reis

No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to June 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. An order to show cause hearing is set for the same date and time for plaintiff to explain why this action against should not be dismissed and/or plaintiff sanctioned for failure to serve the first amended complaint as previously ordered by the court. Additionally, plaintiff again failed to filed a case management conference statement and shall show cause why he should not be subject to sanctions. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing.

CL0001259 Deal, Thomas M v. Fred Gerkensmeyer, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to June 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The operative complaint is the first amended complaint. There appears to be a June 13, 2024 proof of service as to both defendants and no responsive pleading. These minutes shall be distributed to all parties and their counsel including counsel for the Regional Housing Authority, which made a previous appearance. All parties are directed to appear at the next conference.
CL0001985 Cavalry SPV I LLC as assignee of Synchrony vs. Deborah Rawson
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CL0002062 Velocity Investments LLC vs. Devin Smith
This matter will be heard on the 1:00 p.m. calendar.
CL0002352 Sun Forest Springs, LLC vs. Patricia Johnson
Appearances are required. Petitioner shall update court on the status of this case.
CU0000512 eCapital Asset Based Lending v. Medina, Nicole et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to May 19, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in Department 6 following pending motions.
CU0001082 Stephen David Protzman Jr v. Hansen Brothers Enterprises
No appearance is required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to June 16, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 and sets an order to show cause hearing on the same date and time. Plaintiff shall show cause why he should not be sanctioned and/or his case dismissed for failing to comply with the previous order to file a proof of service, an application for service by publication (if desired), or a request for dismissal as directed on December 23, 2024. Plaintiff is also ordered to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for failing to file and serve a timely case management conference statement. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing
CU0001207 Amanda Powell vs. Briarpatch Cooperative Of Nevada, Inc., et al.
No appearances are required. Upon the request of the parties, the court continues this matter to May 5, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for status regarding class approval and settlement. The parties shall file a motion for preliminary approval of class and PAGA settlement prior thereto set for hearing on an appropriate future date.
CU0001386 In the Matter of RISE GRASS VALLEY, INC., a Nevada corporation
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 28, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The court appreciates the parties’ efforts to explore how appropriately to address the issues of this case including their stipulation as to bifurcation. At present, however, the parties have not explained why briefing of 125 pages is required to address the vested-rights related claim. The parties must provide the court with additional information as to the nature and complexity of this issue so that the court can make an informed decision as to the length of briefs to authorize. The parties shall submit a joint statement as to the same of no more than three pages no later than 14 days prior to the next scheduled conference.
CU0001664 Carla Markeeta Jefferson, et al. vs. Heating-Cooling Service Co., et al.
Appearances are required. This case is at issue and the court intends to set trial. The parties shall meet and confer in advance and be prepared to suggest an appropriate trial date.
CU0001723 Umpqua Bank vs. Joseph A. Miller, DMD, Inc., et al.
Appearances are not required. The court has received the March 20, 2025, report of plaintiff including its request to expand the receivership. No withdrawals shall be made from any bank account of the dental business unless agreed by all parties and approved by the court. Defendant shall file any response to the March 20, 2025, report no later than March 26, 2025, noon. Any reply shall be filed no later than March 28, 2025, noon. The matter is set for hearing on the law and motion calendar for April 4, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. A further case management conference will be set on that date.
CU0001796 Sonya Sokolow v. Environmental Health Director Amy Irani
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued until June 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service of summons. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service or request for dismissal no later than one week before the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
CU0001811 Auto Fraud Legal Center LLP fna Rosner, Barry & Babbitt, LLP vs. Dalton Workman
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to June 16, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Defendant Workman shall file a responsive pleading, or plaintiff shall file a request for default (as appropriate) or request for dismissal of defendant at least one week prior to the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
Additionally, Plaintiff failed to submit a case management conference statement. Plaintiff is admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject them to sanctions.
CU22-086160 KEVIN MALONE vs. WILLIAM FERREIRA
Appearances are required. This case is at issue.
Trial is hereby set as follows: 9-day jury trial.

Trial: October 14, 2025, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

PTC: October 3, 2025, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6

MSC: September 22, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

March 17, 2025 Case Management Conference Tentative Rulings

CL0001239 American Express National Bank vs. Rose Cage
No appearances are required. This matter is dismissed with prejudice. The court retains jurisdiction following its dismissal with prejudice and subject to California Civil Procedure Code section 664.6.
CL0001344 Midland Credit Management Inc vs. David Villnow
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CL0001512 Bank of America N.A. vs. Soren Robert Darr
No appearances are required. This matter is dismissed without prejudice. The court retains jurisdiction following its dismissal without prejudice and subject to California Civil Procedure Code section 664.6.
CL0001542 LVNV Funding LLC vs. William E Ferris
No appearances are required. This matter is dismissed without prejudice. The court retains jurisdiction following its dismissal without prejudice and subject to California Civil Procedure Code section 664.6.
CL0002331 United Financial Casualty Company vs. Katie Powers
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued until May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, application for service by publication (if deemed appropriate), or request for dismissal not later than one week before the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
CU0000828 Brooke Brady v. Carol Silverman
Appearances are required. Plaintiff shall show cause why she should not be sanctioned and/or this case dismissed for failing to serve the summons and complaint and failing to appear on September 16, 2024.
CU0000948 Ivan Nyal vs. Jack Bacon
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.
CU0001181 Cynthia Hermosa vs. Adam Rayford Kilpatrick et al.
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. An order to show cause hearing is set for the same date and time for plaintiff to explain why the action against defendant Garrett Warner Woodgrift should not be dismissed and/or plaintiff sanctioned for failure to serve the summons and complaint. Additionally, no party filed a case management conference statement and is admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject it to sanctions. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing.
CU0001257 Barbara Cramer vs. Advanced Home Health and Hospice, Inc., et al.
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. The parties shall be prepared to update the court on the status of this case.
CU0001576 Michael A. Berson, et al. v. Martin, Daniel DDS, et al.
Appearances are required. This case appears at issue, but the court requests confirmation from the parties that all defendants have been served and answered. Specifically, has Daniel C. Martin, DDS Dental Corporation, d/b/a Tahoe Oral Surgery and Implant Center, a named defendant in the complaint, answered this complaint? Upon confirmation, the court is inclined to set trial dates as follows:
Trial is hereby set as follows: 10-day jury trial.

Trial: September 30, 2025, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.
PTC: September 19, 2025, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6
MSC: September 8, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.
CU0001611 Fora Financial Asset Securitization 2021 LLC vs. TJ's Roadhouse of Nevada City LLC, et al.
No appearance is required. A hearing regarding default judgment is set for June 27, 2025, at 1:30 p.m., in Dept. 6.
CU0001620 Beau Grady vs. Loren Ralph Winters
Appearances are required. This case is at issue.
Trial is hereby set as follows: 5-day jury trial.

Trial: December 2, 2025, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.
PTC: November 21, 2025, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6
MSC: November 10, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.
The February 19, 2025 order to show cause is discharged in the interests of justice. The court notes that plaintiff failed to file a case management conference statement as required.
CU0001698 James Saunders Grill v. Eleonore Anderson, et al.
Appearances are not required. The court has entered dismissals with prejudice for both the complaint and cross-complaint as requested.
CU0001781 Kathlene Bonnigson vs. Albertsons Safeway LLC
Appearances are required. This case is at issue. Parties shall confirm availability of dates below.
Trial is hereby set as follows: 7-day jury trial.
Trial: October 28, 2025, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.
PTC: October 17, 2025, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6
MSC: October 6, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.
CU0001787 Carol Lynn Hills v. State of California
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued until May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, application for service by publication (if deemed appropriate), or request for dismissal not later than one week before the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
CU0001793 Jamie Davidson vs. Bluebell Holdings, LLC
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 following defendant’s motion to compel arbitration set for April 4, 2025.
CU0001794 PHH Mortgage Corporation vs. Brenda Marie Durtschi, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Defendant Durtschi shall file a responsive pleading, or plaintiff shall file a request for default (as appropriate) or request for dismissal of defendant at least one week prior to the continued case management conference.
CU0001795 Krissa Connelley vs. Todd Tuggle, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to May 12, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Cross-Complainants shall identify and serve any desired “Roes 1 through 50” by the next case management conference.

March 10, 2025 Case Management Conference Tentative Rulings

CL0001352 Rocky Top Rentals, LLC vs. Maureen Elizabeth Laffey, et al.
No appearances are required or authorized. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to May 5, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. An order to show cause hearing is set for the same date and time for plaintiff to explain why the action should not be dismissed and/or plaintiff sanctioned for failure to serve the summons and complaint, which has been ordered multiple times by the court. Additionally, plaintiff did not file a case management conference statement and is admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject it to sanctions. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing.
CL0001658 Rikki Colby vs. T. L. Sory, et al.
No appearances are required or authorized. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to March 21, 2025, at 1:00 p.m. in Department 6 to align with the hearing for default judgment.
CL0002308 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. vs. Brianna C. Sawdey
Appearances are required. The court is in receipt of a notice of settlement filed February 19, 2025. Thereafter, defendant filed an answer. The parties shall update the court on the status of this case.
CL0002311 United Financial Casualty Company vs. Kaifus Klae Knoefler
No appearances are required or authorized. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued until May 5, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 6. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, application for service by publication (if deemed appropriate), or request for dismissal not later than one week before the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
CU0000284 Tod DuBois v Scott Fetty, et al.
No appearances are required or authorized. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to March 30, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 in light of plaintiff’s pending motion for a preliminary injunction. The defendants have not filed timely case management conference statements and are admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject the parties to sanctions.
CU0000873 Dalton Deornellas, et al. vs. General Motors, LLC
No appearances are required or authorized. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to June 2, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 for a status regarding settlement and dismissal.
CU0001475 Westcon Construction Corp. vs. Nevada Irrigation District
Appearances are required. At the last case management conference, the court continued this matter to provide the parties additional time to complete mediation. The court now seeks an update on the status of this litigation. This case is at issue and it is the court’s intention to set trial dates unless a resolution has been reached. Additionally, the parties have not submitted a case management conference statement and are admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject the parties to sanctions.
CU0001491 Amy Barker vs. Dynasty Valley, LLC
No appearance is required or authorized. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to September 8, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 to give the parties time to complete binding arbitration.
CU0001525 State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company vs. Joshua Edward Daniel
No appearances are required or authorized. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to May 5, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Defendant shall file a responsive pleading, or plaintiff shall file a request for default (as appropriate) or request for dismissal of defendant prior to the continued case management conference.
CU0001651 Joseph Sacks vs. Navy Federal Credit Union
No appearances are required or authorized. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to April 14, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 in light of the pendency of defendant’s motion for demurrer.
CU0001653 Magic Sun Solar, Inc. vs. Shawn Mccall, individually and as Trustee, et al.
Appearances are required. Defendant Sean McCall is ordered to show cause why any answer or cross complaint filed by Shawn McCall, in propria persona, on behalf of the trust, should not be stricken. See Estate of Sanchez (2023) 95 Cal.App.5th 331, 339-340 (personal representative of estate cannot appear out of probate cases without counsel).
CU0001723 Umpqua Bank vs. Joseph A. Miller, DMD, Inc.
Appearances are required. The court requires an update from the parties and the receiver on the status of this case.
CU0001762 William Dean Ferreira vs. Stephanie Diane Stone-Ferreira, et al.
No appearances are required or authorized. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 in light of defendant Malone’s pending motion to strike.
CU0001779 Gladys Watson et al vs. Connect Property et al
Appearances are not required. This case is at issue.

Trial is hereby set as follows: 5-day jury trial.

Trial: November 18, 2025, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

PTC: November 7, 2025, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6

MSC: October 20, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

CU0001780 Elliott Allen Roberts vs. Austin Wallace
No appearances are required or authorized. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued until May 5, 2025, at 9:00 a.m., in Dept. 6. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, application for service by publication (if deemed appropriate), or request for dismissal not later than one week before the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
CU0001781 Kathlene Bonnigson vs. Albertsons Safeway LLC
Appearances are not required. This case is at issue.

Trial is hereby set as follows: 7-day jury trial.
Trial: October 28, 2025, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.
PTC: October 17, 2025, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6
MSC: October 6, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

CU0001783 Collin Smith vs. Dave's Landscaping, Inc
Appearances are not required. This case is at issue.

Trial is hereby set as follows: 5-day jury trial.
Trial: November 18, 2025, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.
PTC: November 7, 2025, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6
MSC: October 20, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

CU20-084651 Julian M. Backrak, et al vs. Grass Valley Mobile Home Park LLC, et al.
No appearances are required or authorized. The court confirms all previously scheduled dates.
CU21-085655 Nicholas Findley vs. Christopher Anderson et al.
No appearances are required. This matter is dismissed with prejudice. The court retains jurisdiction following its dismissal with prejudice and subject to California Civil Procedure Code section 664.6.
CU21-085797 Koslin and Koslin Construction, Inc. vs. GV Developments LLC
Appearances are required for status regarding dismissal. If the parties wish the court to retain jurisdiction, they should file a written stipulation under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.

March 3, 2025 Case Management Conference Tentative Rulings

CL0002091 Laurie Kristin Agee vs. Melissa Loper
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 and sets an order to show cause hearing on the same date and time. Plaintiff will show cause why she should not be sanctioned for failing to file a proof of service of the amended complaint as ordered by the court on January 6, 2025. Additionally, plaintiff has filed proofs of service listing Brian Loper as a served party. However, Brian Loper is not named in the amended complaint. Plaintiff is ordered to file an amended complaint, if necessary, no later than one week prior to the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing.
CL0002108 Dorton Drywall, et al. vs. James Clarke, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.
CL0002278 JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. vs. Vikki L. Vincenzi
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Defendant shall file a responsive pleading, or plaintiff shall file a request for default (as appropriate) or request for dismissal of defendant prior to the continued case management conference.
CU0000385 Derek Olsen, et al. v. David Sugalski, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Defendant Wild Acorns Learning Village Inc., shall file a responsive pleading, or plaintiff shall file a request for default (as appropriate) or request for dismissal of same defendant prior to the continued case management conference.
CU0000512 eCapital Asset Based Lending v. Nicole Medina, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to May 19, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6.
CU0000712 Sandra Demara vs. Douglas Vernon
No appearances are required. The court is in receipt of the request for dismissal with prejudice. This case is dismissed with prejudice.
CU0001183 John S. McCormick, Jr. vs. General Motors, LLC.
No appearances are required. The joint stipulation of the parties has been signed by the court. The court dismisses this case with prejudice and retains jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the terms of the Joint Stipulation for Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §664.6
CU0001418 John Albert Bacon and Sandra Jacoby Bacon, Trustees, etc. vs. Statewide Homes, Inc.
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued until April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m., in Dept. 6. The court was unable to locate an answer from cross-defendant Statewide Homes, Inc. to cross-complainant Champion Home Builders October 23, 2024 cross-complaint. In the next case management conference statements, all parties shall confirm their understanding regarding service of process as to all parties in the complaint and cross-complaints.
CU0001540 Bradley Dorigo, et al. vs. County of Nevada
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued until April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m., in Dept. 6. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, application for service by publication (if deemed appropriate), or request for dismissal not later than one week before the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
CU0001616 California Heirloom Tomato Company, et al. v. Jimenez, John et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 and sets an order to show cause hearing on the same date and time. Plaintiff will show cause why they should not be sanctioned for failing to file a proof of service for defendants Jenney Vanzant and Placer Foreclosure as ordered by the court on December 30, 2024. Plaintiff shall also show cause why they failed to file a proof of service, request for publication or request for dismissal regarding defendant John Jimenez as ordered on December 30, 2024. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing.
Finally, Plaintiff has not filed a timely case management conference statement and is admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject plaintiff to sanctions.
CU0001640 Evan Benn, et al. vs. Diamond P. Properties, LLC, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 and sets an order to show cause hearing on the same date and time. Plaintiff will show cause why they failed to file a proof of service, request for publication or request for dismissal regarding defendant Diamond P Properties LLC., as ordered on January 6, 2025. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing.
Finally, neither Plaintiff nor Defendant Collins Property Management have filed a timely case management conference statement and are admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject the parties to sanctions.
CU0001643 Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC vs. Ashley Parker, et al.
No appearances are required. There are no responsive pleadings from either defendant. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Defendants shall file responsive pleadings, or plaintiff shall file a request for default (as appropriate) or request for dismissal of defendant prior to the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference.
Additionally, no party filed a timely case management conference statement and is admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject the party to sanctions.
CU0001649 Debbie Havener vs. Shawna Sullivan et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on February 14, 2025. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, request for publication or request for dismissal for defendants Shawna Sullivan and California Department of Transportation at least one week prior to the continued case management conference.
CU0001652 Pawnee Leasing Corporation vs. 1st Choice R & R LLC, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6 and sets an order to show cause hearing on the same date and time. Plaintiff will show cause why they should not be sanctioned and/or their case dismissed for failing to file a request for default regarding defendant First Choice R&R, LLC., as ordered by the court on January 6, 2025. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing.

Finally, plaintiff has not filed a timely case management conference statement and is admonished that failure to serve a statement for future case management conferences may subject plaintiff to sanctions.

CU0001656 Richard Cristdahl v. Capital One Financial Corporation, Inc., et al.
Appearances are required. The court is in receipt of the notice of settlement regarding Defendant Capital One Financial Corporation, Inc. As to Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc., it appears this case is at issue. However, neither plaintiff nor defendant Experian filed a timely case management conference statement. Parties shall meet, confer, and be prepared to select trial dates at the case management conference.
CU0001715 William Neil v. County of Nevada, et. al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. It does not appear that the First Amended Complaint, filed February 5, 2025, has been served on any of the defendants. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, an application for service by publication (if deemed appropriate), or a request for dismissal no later than one week prior to the continued case management conference date. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference date.
CU0001750 McKellar Tree Service & Logging, Inc. vs. Blue Lead Gold Mining, LLC et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to April 21, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, request for publication or request for dismissal as to defendant Enegix Mining Group at least one week prior to the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference date.
CU0001758 Kevin Snider vs. Linda Cavallaro
Appearances are not required. This case is at issue.

Trial is hereby set as follows: 5-day jury trial.

Trial: October 28, 2025, 9:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

PTC: October 17, 2025, 11:00 a.m., Dept. 6

MSC: September 29, 2025, 10:00 a.m., Dept. 6.

CU0001760 In the Matter of County of Nevada
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to March 14, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 6 to align with the Second Amended Notice of Hearing filed January 24, 2025.
CU0001761 Ashley Sanchez vs. Vail Resorts Management Co., et al.
Appearances are required. Defendants failed to file a timely case management conference statement and are admonished failure to do so in the future may result in sanctions. The parties shall meet, confer, and be prepared to update the court on the status of this litigation.
CU0001766 Tessa Hart vs. Hooper & Weaver Mortuary, Inc.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to May 12, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. The parties shall update the court on the status of mediation prior to the continued case management conference date.
CU0001768 Richard Herbert Morris III vs. William Hauer, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the court continues the case management conference to May 12, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 6. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, request for publication or request for dismissal as to defendants prior to the continued case management conference. Alternatively, plaintiff shall file a notice of settlement, if applicable, prior to the continued case management conference date. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference date.
CU19-083425 Fire Insurance Exchange vs. Powermax Electric Co., et al.
No appearances are required. This case is dismissed without prejudice in light of the notice of settlement.

April 03, 2025 Department 3 Guardianship Annual Review Tentative Ruling

Notice:

These are the Court’s tentative rulings. Attorneys and parties are directed to review the tentative rulings prior to the scheduled hearing. These tentative rulings will be adopted by the Court, unless the guardian and / or parent personally appears at the hearing and objects to the tentative ruling. The person requesting that appearance must notify the other party / parties AND the court before 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing date.

Email OA@nccourt.net with a copy to the other party / parties to give this notice. You may appear by video by arranging a remote appearance at least two court days prior to hearing by emailing: nccounter@nccourt.net. The email subject line needs to contain Zoom Request: Hearing date, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 for Case #. Fill in the correct date and case number, of course.

If you need any help with the information in the tentative ruling, you can:

Find Your Court Forms - Guardianship for the forms stated in the tentative ruling. OR
Submit a Self-Help request OR
Send email to selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net OR
Come to the Court’s Self-Help Center Monday through Friday for forms and information about the next steps. OR
Consult a private attorney.

04/03/2025 at 9:00 a.m.

Guardianship Calendar Tentative Rulings Department 3

Case No. P16-15886 In the Matter of: Grace J.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interests of the minor. The Court has reviewed the GC 251 Annual Confidential Status Report filed on 03/14/2025. Your appearance on Thursday, 04/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. The next annual review hearing is set for Thursday, 04/02/2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of the Superior Court of California Please check the Court website 2 business days before the hearing date to verify if you need to come to that hearing date.

Case No. P17-16220 In the Matter of: Jonathan S.

The Court has not received the GC-251 Annual Confidential Status Report from the Guardians. The matter is set for hearing on Thursday, 04/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of the Superior Court of California. Personal appearance is required.

If you need forms or assistance with the orders, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.

Case No. P17-16221 In the Matter of: Zoey S.

If you need forms or assistance with the orders, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.

Case No. P19-16465 In the Matter of: Haley W.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interests of the minor. The Court has reviewed the GC 251 Annual Confidential Status Report filed on 02/21/2025. Your appearance on Thursday, 04/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. The next annual review hearing is set for Thursday, 04/02/2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of the Superior Court of California Please check the Court website 2 business days before the hearing date to verify if you need to come to that hearing date.

Case No. P21-16820 In the Matter of: Teagan D.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interests of the minor. The Court has reviewed the GC 251 Annual Confidential Status Report filed on 03/17/2025. Your appearance on Thursday, 04/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. The next annual review hearing is set for Thursday, 04/02/2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of the Superior Court of California Please check the Court website 2 business days before the hearing date to verify if you need to come to that hearing date.

Case No. PR0000179 In the Matter of: Summer S.

Guardianship remains necessary, convenient and in the best interests of the minor. The Court has reviewed the GC 251 Annual Confidential Status Report filed on 03/07/2025. Your appearance on Thursday, 04/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary. The next annual review hearing is set for Thursday, 04/02/2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of the Superior Court of California Please check the Court website 2 business days before the hearing date to verify if you need to come to that hearing date.

Case No. PR0000180 In the Matter of: Zachary S.

The Court has reviewed the GC 251 Annual Confidential Status Report filed on 03/07/2025. Minor has attained the age of majority. The guardianship has terminated as a matter of law.

Case No. PR0000462 In the Matter of: Riley M.

The Court notes that the minor has moved out of Nevada County but within California. GC-080 Change of Address form is needed. Guardians may want to file request to change of venue with this Court to their new county of residence.

Friday, April 4, 2025 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference

Friday, March 21, 2025 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference

Friday, March , 7 2025 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference

Friday, February, 7 2025 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference

Friday, January 3, 2025 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference

Friday, December 6, 2024 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference

Friday, November 1,2024 Department 3 Family Law Status Conference

Family Law Status Conference standard order terms.

The following terms apply to all of the below cases and are incorporated by reference into the tentative decision for each case. Review them carefully.

These are the Court’s tentative rulings. In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and, thereafter, notify the clerk’s office by email at OA@nccourt.net or by calling (530)362-4309, Ext. 4 no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day prior to the date and time set for hearing. If you do not so notify all other parties and the Court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling of the Court.
If neither party gives that notice, your appearance at the status conference. is not necessary UNLESS the tentative decision in your case requires that appearance.
No Judgment has been entered in this case yet. No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.
If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 5. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
If both parties want to opt out of further status conference, each must notify the Clerk at nccounter@nccourt.net, with a copy to the other party. Unless both parties opt out at least three (3) court days before the status conference date, appearance at the next status conference is required.
If both parties opt out of the status conference process, the orders to serve and file the above documents will be vacated at the time that this opt out is effective. These documents will still be required before the case can proceed further. The Court can place the case back on the Status Conference calendar and reinstate a filing deadline for these documents on request of either party or by the Court giving notice of a new Status Conference date.
Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.

______________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001395

Petitioner: Restad, Barbara

Attorney: Montero, John V.

Respondent: Restad, Lawrence

Attorney: Self-Represented

No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. No further status conference will be set.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001441

Petitioner: Menig, Faith

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Menig, Ryan

Attorney: Miller, Chandra (Ltd scope)

This is the third status conference. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. No further status conference will be set.
Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001458

Petitioner: Dalmau, Brandee

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Martinelli, David

Attorney: Walters, Cleat

This is the third status conference. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. No further status conference will be set.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001467

Petitioner: Andrews, Jodi

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Walsh, Robert

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. No further status conference will be set.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001502

Petitioner: Garcia, Thomas Ronald

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Garcia, Candice S.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Judgment was entered between these parties in Case # FL0001500 on 07/22/2024. No case management is needed. The Court intends to dismiss this case if no party appears and shows cause why the matter should not be dismissed.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001508

Petitioner: Toohey, Candice

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Toohey, Brian

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. No further status conference will be set.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-110 Summons on Amended Petition
2. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons on original petition and on amended petition. OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
3. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
4. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001776

Petitioner: Clanton, Erinlee

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Clanton, Christopher

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
  1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001992

Petitioner: Skowyra, Allyssa Fennelly

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Skowyra, Daniel Joseph

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002007

Petitioner: Peterson, Julia Anne

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Miller, Matthew Scott

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002023

Petitioner: Leonard, Tamera Ann

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Leonard Michael Ryan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
3. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002050

Petitioner: Martinelli, Christopher Edmund

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Martinelli, Jennifer Lisa

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
3. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
4. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002063

Petitioner: Johnson, Nathan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Johnson, Heather

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
  1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002407

Petitioner: Jaime, Kasey

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Jaime, David

Attorney: Anderson, William

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002539

Petitioner: Whetton, Lucy

Attorney: Alexander, Kristen

Respondent: Whetton, Guy

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002541

Petitioner: Monroe, Murli

Attorney: Mercer, Eric

Respondent: Guzman, Bryan Allen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
  1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002542

Petitioner: Tracy, Michelle

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Lavoie, Jeremie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
3. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
4. FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002543

Petitioner: Block, Sharlene Renee

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Block, Jeffery Steven

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002549

Petitioner: Berry, Rick

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Berry, Lisa Bonney

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002564

Petitioner: Canepa, Gabriella Frances

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Canepa, Andre Jae

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
2. MC-030 Declaration to re-submit Judgment for review.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002569

Petitioner: Luquin, Lauren Kathleen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Luquin, Edward Alexis-Garcia

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002570

Petitioner: Cook, Jeffrey

Attorney: Walters, Cleat

Respondent: Cook, Christina

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002585

Petitioner: Ross, Brittany

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Ross, Aaron Manual

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002593

Petitioner: Justyn, Emily

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Stafford, David Reed

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002620

Petitioner: Henslee, Shannon

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Henslee, Daniel Paul

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002631

Petitioner: Ford, Laura

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Harrison, Christopher Sr.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002640

Petitioner: Saari, Melinda Vienna

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Edgerton, Jamie Allen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002652

Petitioner: Ostrofe, Sabine L.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Ostrofe, Allen F.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
  1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

04/04/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL21-016368

Petitioner: Demara, Sandra

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Demara, Robert

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The original Petition in this matter was filed on 03/15/2021 and served on 03/24/2024. The Court intends to deem the Petition filed on 09/19/2024 an Amended Petition based on that filing. The Court has not received proof of service of the Petition and Summons filed on 09/19/2024. Both must be served to proceed with this matter.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/21/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FLFL0002566

Petitioner: Clifford, Callie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Clifford, Traver

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 10/03/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 10/01/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 10/03/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0000830

Petitioner: Adams, Richard

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Adams, Tanya

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance or further status conference is contemplated by the Court at this time.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0000903

Petitioner: Schwartz, Patrick

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Schwartz, Lacey B.

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. No continuance or further status conference is contemplated by the Court at this time.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL00001398

Petitioner: Tipton, Brittany

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Cook, Jared

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance or further status conference is contemplated by the Court at this time.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001416

Petitioner: Mantooth, Colleen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Mantooth, Steve

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001723

Petitioner: Hood, Megan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Hood, Brian

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001898

Petitioner: Mallo, Mona-Lisa

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Mallo, Mark

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001915

Petitioner: Griffiths, Melinda Sue

Attorney: Anderson, James

Respondent: Fritz, Daryl Wayne

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001960

Petitioner: Keyser, Kevin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Keyser, Rebekah

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

_________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001961

Petitioner: Vargas. Jeffrey

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Vargas, Molly

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001981

Petitioner: Farrell, Marcia Webster

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Farrell, Douglas Ted

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001982

Petitioner: Brautigam, Nga

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Brautigam, Jared

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001995

Petitioner: Colbert, Danyel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Bartoli, Vincent

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-270 Response to Petition for Custody and Support of Minor Children OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002005

Petitioner: Rodriguez, Hope

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Rodriguez, David

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002018

Petitioner: Samson, Allison Rivers

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Samson, David Scott

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002029

Petitioner: Sullivan, Shelly

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Morrow, Nico

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. .
2. Corrected FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons . FL-115 is not complete. The address of service information is missing. If the original server is not available to correct this, the documents will need to be re-served. When the Court has the correct Proof of Service, the Court requires one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002397

Petitioner: Gerhart, Audrey

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Gerhart, Keith

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002417

Petitioner: Peterson, Ingrid

Attorney: Christie, Nancy

Respondent: Carter, Tom

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
3. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
4. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002433

Petitioner: Rocha, Ashley Anne

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Rocha. Lionel Cardoza II

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002475

Petitioner: LaGrou, Melanie

Attorney: Anderson, Sara (Ltd scope)

Respondent: Gardner, Brian

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons only if parties want termination of marital status before 03/19/2025.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002498

Petitioner: Guiterrez, Samantha

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Guiterrez, Israel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. Since Judgment was declined because there were no child support forms and calculation attached when the judgment did not actually ask for child support at this time, Petitioner needs to file an explanation and request re-submission. For forms or assistance with that, Petitioner may contact the attorney of her choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 5. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002500

Petitioner: Hostetter, Raymond Wayne

Attorney: Klein, w. Gregory

Respondent: Hostetter, Shana Lee Johnson

Attorney: Anderson, James

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002504

Petitioner: Dixon, Jerry

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Dixon, Kaye

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002516

Petitioner: Foster, Mark

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Foster, Heather

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002517

Petitioner: Greene, Hannah Breeze

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Greene, Adam Abraham

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002518

Petitioner: Thibodeaux, Jennifer

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Thibodeaux, John

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002533

Petitioner: Baker, Typer Robert

Attorney: Bell, Joseph

Respondent: Baker, Sherron Angell

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002535

Petitioner: Kroner, Elisha

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Kroner, Adam

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002554

Petitioner: Baker, Megan Rebecca

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Baker, Christian Lee

Attorney: Granger, Jennifer

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002565

Petitioner: Weisman, Zachary D.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Don, Evangelina

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 09/05/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 09/03/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 09/05/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

03/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002579

Petitioner: Foster, Jeff

Attorney: Strasser, Laura (ltd scope) Self-Represented

Respondent: Johnson, Ellen

Attorney: Gettys, Canence (Ltd scope) Self-Represented

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001315

Petitioner: Piaget, Isis

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Roldan, Pedro Merida

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001324

Petitioner: Gardner, Michael A.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Lucero, Sara J.

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001765

Petitioner: Kenyon, Alison

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Kenyon, Eric

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. Corrected FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons . FL-115 is not complete. The date and time of service are missing. If original server is not available to correct this, the documents will need to be re-served. Once correct Proof of Service has been filed, the Court requires one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001804

Petitioner: Langlois, Mary Lou

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Langlois, David Bruce

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001820

Petitioner: Flecksteiner, Annessa

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Flecksteiner, Jeffrey

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:.
1. Corrected FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons . FL-115 is not complete. The address information is missing. If original server is not available to correct this, the documents will need to be re-served. Once date of Service has been filed, the Court requires one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001826

Petitioner: LeVeaux, Devon

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Lopez LeVeaux, Antonio

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001874

Petitioner: Holstrom, Richard III

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Holstrom, Ashley

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001905

Petitioner: Alvarado, Jesseca R.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Alvarado, Brian M.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002227

Petitioner: Wright, Dean Norman

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Wright, Carolyn Jill Crist

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002339

Petitioner: Greeley, India

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Greeley, Erik

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
2. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002349

Petitioner: Gordon, Gwen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Keyser, Herbert Carter

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002351

Petitioner: Gilchrist, Leanne

Attorney: Carter, Gregory

Respondent: Gilchrist, Timothy

Attorney: Bell, Joseph

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002356

Petitioner: Allen, Adriana

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Allen, Dustin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002360

Petitioner: Phillips, Morgan

Attorney: Foley, Ryan

Respondent: Phillips, Chandler

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002362

Petitioner: Smith, Andrea

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Smith, Jonathan Jeffrey-Lee

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002367

Petitioner: DeMario, Christopher

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: DeMario, Jamie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002373

Petitioner: Morales, Skye

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Morales, Jackie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002378

Petitioner: Dionne, Terii

Attorney: Christie, Nancy

Respondent: Van Der Zalm, Erikl

Attorney: Walters, Cleat

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002384

Petitioner: Foster, Scott Foster

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Foster, Andrea

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002391

Petitioner: Woodruff, Joseph

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: DeGennaro, Brandy

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002394

Petitioner: Wells, Lisa

Attorney: Walters, Cleat

Respondent: Wells, Ryan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002396

Petitioner: Thibodeau, Jaime

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Lucero, Angel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002401

Petitioner: Uribe, Cesar J.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Kelly, Nicole C.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. Corrected FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons . If original server is not available to correct this, the documents will need to be re-served. Once date of Service has been filed, the Court requires one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served and request to set prove-up hearing.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002404

Petitioner: Kiser, Lissa

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Kiser, Richard Jr.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002408

Petitioner: McLees, Ryan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: McLees, Giedre

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002418

Petitioner: Green Wells, Megan Frances

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Wells, Michael Ryan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002423

Petitioner: Garcia, Ruth Debora

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Garcia, John

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner AND Request to set prove-up hearing for nullity facts.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002425

Petitioner: Dreher, Elizabeth

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Dreher, Douglas Joseph

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002429

Petitioner: Foster, Kathy Ellen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Johnson, Samuel Elan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002437

Petitioner: Ingle, Robert

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Ingle, Melyssa

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002450

Petitioner: Nunnink, Danny

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Nunnink, Kyle

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

02/07/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002472

Petitioner: Mason, Kasi

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Mason, Timothy

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/1/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

*****

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001023

Petitioner: Davis, Jerrett

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Davis, Angel

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001159

Petitioner: Hojnacki, Jennifer

Attorney: Medina, Angelina

Respondent: Taapa, Jonathon

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review. If Judgment is entered before the status conference, no appearance is required.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL00001176

Petitioner: Adachi, Craig

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Adachi, Susan

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001193

Petitioner: Belendez, Rachel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Belendez, Robert

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001197

Petitioner: Trethewey, Mary E.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Trethewey, Paul M.

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001203

Petitioner: Selletti, Stephanie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Selletti, Justin

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001683

Petitioner: Skellenger, Jason

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Skellener, Katherine

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001710

Petitioner: Goodyear, Amelia

Attorney: Walters, Cleat

Respondent: Hippert, Joseph

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001712

Petitioner: Kanani, Babak

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Kanani, Miriam

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001763

Petitioner: Menezes, Rebecca

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Menezes, Freddie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001777

Petitioner: Brace, George

Attorney: Klein, W. Gregory

Respondent: Brace, Darci

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002282

Petitioner: Peternell, Raymond

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Peternell, Megan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002297

Petitioner: Nicholson, Cynthia Louise

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Nicholson, Justin Levi

Attorney: Gettys, Candence

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002312

Petitioner: Turek, Ricki Roberts

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Turek, Daniel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
3. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
4. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002314

Petitioner: Coulter, Crystal S.

Attorney: Granger, Jennifer

Respondent: Coulter, Chris G.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002324

Petitioner: Entler, Ruby

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Shaw, Luke

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002326

Petitioner: Dugan, Kenneth

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Dugan, Tina Thayer C.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. Summons was not filed with the Petition. Court intends to issue an OSC to dismiss the case. Petitioner can cure this by filing Summons on or before December 31, 2024.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002333

Petitioner: Herzig, James

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Brown, Jessica

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002366

Petitioner: Click, Kevin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Richardson, Hanamae

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 08/01/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 07/29/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 08/01/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

01/03/2025, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002379

Petitioner: Montgomery, Linda

Attorney: Thompson, Sara

Respondent: Montgomery, Mark

Attorney: Gettys, Candence

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001040

Petitioner: Williams, Kendall

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Williams, RIcky

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001071

Petitioner: VanValkenberg. Angela

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Clark, Gavin

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001076

Petitioner: Duarte, Miriah

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Nicholson, Clint

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001103

Petitioner: Ly, Sarah

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Ly, Cun

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
2. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001105

Petitioner: Lerche, Ella

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Ramsay, Mitchell

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. The Status Conference is dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
2. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001109

Petitioner: Dunmire, Judy

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Dunmire, David

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
4. The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001140

Petitioner: Whitley, Sierra

Attorney: Klein, W. Gregory

Respondent: Whitley, Thomas

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

_________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001313

Petitioner: Carver, Christopher

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Carver, Renee

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
  1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001619

Petitioner: Knox, Keenen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Zolling, Kimberly

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-270 Response to Petition for Custody and Support of Minor Children OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001623

Petitioner: Kendrick, Scott

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Kendrick, Karen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001626

Petitioner: Gutierrez Agoado, Christine

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Gutierrez Agoado, Richard

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.
There are issues with service of process before the case can move forward.
If you need forms or assistance with the orders, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 5. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001629

Petitioner: Driggs, Kristin L.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Driggs, Jeffrey P.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001644

Petitioner: Peeler, Jennifer Jasmine

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Peeler, Jason Daniel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001651

Petitioner: Ford, Tara

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Tyner, Cath

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001673

Petitioner: Dana, Jayleen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Dana, Justin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001692

Petitioner: Tostenson, Briannahlyn

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Tostenson, Michael

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
2. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001702

Petitioner: Avery, Stephanie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Avery, Jerry

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002166

Petitioner: Nesbit, MIchele

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Nesbit, Evan Ryan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002167

Petitioner: Grose, May

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Gunderson, David Byron

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002173

Petitioner: Nigro, Emily

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Nigro, Vincent

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002176

Petitioner: Hinrichs, Sandra

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Salmonson, Karl

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002178

Petitioner: Cyrus, Sonja

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Cyrus, Kalvin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002190

Petitioner: Plisik, Michael J.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Plisik, Kristina M.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002199

Petitioner: Lachman, Lori

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: McAlinn, Shawn

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002204

Petitioner: DeLaughter, Breannah

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: DeLaughter, Cory

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002205

Petitioner: Martinez, Sophie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Martinez, Anthony James

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of th tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002216

Petitioner: Kemmer, Suzanne

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Tackaberry, Michael

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the date and delivery method of the documents.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002217

Petitioner: Kenney, Amanda

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Kenney, Jeffrey

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002219

Petitioner: Castro, Kayla

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Castro, Louis

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. Corrected FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons . FL-115 is not complete. The address / date / time / server information is missing. If original server is not available to correct this, the documents will need to be re-served. Once date of Service has been filed, the Court requires one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14 Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner more than thirty days after Petition package has been served. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002220

Petitioner: Taylor-Hren, Mewgan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Elliott, Jeremiah

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002221

Petitioner: Cregar, Christina

Attorney: Ewing, Janet

Respondent: Groom, Ray

Attorney: Thompson, Sara

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002228

Petitioner: Torres, Pablo

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Yarala, Stephanie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002235

Petitioner: Thompson, Robert Wesley

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Alee, Rhonda Lee

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.
The parties asked for inconsistent underlying relief which cannot be resolved at a Status Conference.
If you need forms or assistance with the procedure, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net or 530-362-4309, Ext. 5. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002237

Petitioner: Pasciutti, James Danile

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Pasciutti, Donette Rose

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
3. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002258

Petitioner: Thompson, Aaron

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Cohen, Liz

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002272

Petitioner: Marks, Cory Thomas

Attorney: Bell, Joseph

Respondent: Marks, Isadora Pacheco

Attorney: Gettys, Candence

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.

The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002278

Petitioner: Lund, Ryan

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Hunt, Kylie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-105 GC-120(A) Declaration Under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) from Respondent
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002285

Petitioner: Peebles, Travis

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Peebles, Samantha

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

12/06/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002290

Petitioner: Amezcus, Corinne

Attorney: Thompson, Sara

Respondent: Amezcus, Kenneth

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 06/06/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 06/02/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 06/06/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

Friday, 11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3 Family Law Status Conference calendar

If you need any help with the next step in your case, you can:

Find Your Court Forms - Divorce for the forms stated in the tentative ruling. OR
Submit a Self-Help request OR
Send email to selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net OR
Come to the Court’s Self-Help Center Monday through Friday for forms and information about the next steps. Open hours are on the Court web site. The Self-Help Center can help you find/complete the forms to move your case to the next step. OR
Consult a private attorney.

Family Law Status Conference standard order terms.

The following terms apply to all of the below cases and are incorporated by reference into the tentative decision for each case. Review them carefully.

If either party wishes to object to the tentative decision and to appear in Court on the date stated above, that party must notify the other party and also notify the Court Clerk by telephone to 530-362-4309 Ext. 4 or by email to nccounter@nccourt.net no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the current Status Conference date. If neither party gives this notice, the tentative decision will be adopted as the order of the Court.

If neither party gives that notice, your appearance on the current Status Conference date at 9:00 a.m. is not necessary UNLESS the order in your case requires that appearance.

No Judgment has been entered in this case yet. No Judgment or other orders will be entered automatically. Moving forward with this case will require action from at least one party.

If you need forms or assistance with the orders in item 2, you may contact the attorney of your choice or the Nevada County Court Self-Help Center at selfhelpcenter@nccourt.net. See Superior Court of the County of Nevada - Self Help Center | Family Law Facilitator | Small Claims Advisor (nccourt.net) for hours and further information.

If both parties want to opt out of further status conference, each must notify the Clerk at nccounter@nccourt.net, with a copy to the other party. Unless both parties opt out at least three (3) court days before the status conference date, appearance at the next status conference is required.

If both parties opt out of the status conference process, the orders to serve and file the above documents will be vacated at the time that this opt out is effective. These documents will still be required before the case can proceed further. The Court can place the case back on the Status Conference calendar and reinstate a filing deadline for these documents on request of either party or by the Court giving notice of a new Status Conference date.

Submission of a settlement agreement and Judgment documents will vacate the Status Conference only after the Judge has approved the Judgment.

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0000993

Petitioner: Brown, Courtney

Attorney: Besselman, Nina

Respondent: Brown, David

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0000994

Petitioner: Hines, Gwendelyn

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Hines, Philip

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001032

Petitioner: Parmenter, Tina

Attorney: Klein, W. Gregory

Respondent: Parmenter, Christopher

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Both parties submitted FL-20 questionnaires stating that the case is not ready for supervised settlement conference at this time. The case is dropped from further Status Conference review.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001058

Petitioner: Stockdale. Gabriella

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Stockdale, Jonathan Ross

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001092

Petitioner: Aplington, George

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Aplington, Dana

Attorney: Self-Represented

This is the third status conference. Personal appearance is required. No continuance is contemplated by the Court at this time. If Petitioner does not appear at the status conference, the case will be dropped from further Status Conference review.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001545

Petitioner: Nielson, Kyla

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Corbett, Wade

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the delivery method of the documents.
2. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
3. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
4. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001570

Petitioner: Martisko, Mollie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Martisko, Chase

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001583

Petitioner: Nyman, Marianne

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Nyman, Daniel

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001586

Petitioner: Setzer, Joe C.

Attorney: John Downing

Respondent: Setzer, Darline L.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001592

Petitioner: Zahediahrami, Seyed Habibollah

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Moseley, Haley Elizabeth

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001600

Petitioner: Talley, Krystal

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Carson, Alexander

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001609

Petitioner: Cancino, Jose Luis

Attorney: Granger, Jennifer

Respondent: Cancino, Diane

Attorney: Lindsay, Kathy

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001611

Petitioner: Deschaine, Shauneen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Deschaine, Tyler

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001616

Petitioner: Nelson, Geoffrey

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Nelson, Allison

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001618

Petitioner: Prieto, Savanna

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Prieto, Antonio

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-105 GC-120(A) Declaration Under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) from eacb party.
2. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the delivery method of the documents.
3. Corrected FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent. Current FL-141 does not have complete information for the delivery method of the documents.
4. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Petitioner.
5. FL20 Status Conference Questionnaire (Nevada County) from Respondent.
6. The Court notes that FL-141 forms have been filed by both parties. Local FL 20 Status Conference Questionnaire from each party should address the resolved issues, the unresolved issues, whether the case would benefit from supervised settlement conference and / or is ready for trial setting.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

_________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0001670

Petitioner: Hanson, Lora

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Hanson, Dustin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed. Publication order was granted, but proof of service by publication has not been filed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002057

Petitioner: Sawi, Kayla

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Sawi, Jared

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. Proof of Service has not been received. When it has been at least 30 days since the Summons and Petition were served on Respondent, one of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002097

Petitioner: Berger, Paul S.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Hayes, Susan E.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002100

Petitioner: Blanchard, Damayanti

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Blanchard, Dusty

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002110

Petitioner: Strouss, Nicole

Attorney: Gettys, Candence

Respondent: Strouss, Ian

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons of original Summons and Petition. Page 2 of Amended Petition.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002113

Petitioner: Ingram, Rebecca Jane

Attorney: Miller, Chandra

Respondent: Ingram, David Sean

Attorney: Moore, James

Both parties are represented by an attorney. No appearance by parties or counsel is necessary at this Status Conference. The Court presumes that no further Status Conference is necessary at this time. The matter may be restored to the Status Conference at the request of either party or by notice from the Court. The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.

The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002116

Petitioner: Perrine, Kellie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Perrine, II, Lyndon

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002117

Petitioner: Halberg, Helen

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Halberg, Austin

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-115 Proof of Service of Summons OR request from Petitioner for additional time to serve documents OR CIV-110 Request for Dismissal if Petitioner no longer wants to proceed.
2. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
3. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002137

Petitioner: Henson, Joseph Scott

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Henson, Eva Marie

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent.
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002140

Petitioner: Frye, Jeana C.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Frye, Dwaine

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.

The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

STATUS CONFERENCE TENTATIVE DECISION

11/01/2024, 9:00 a.m. Department 3

Case No. FL0002152

Petitioner: Peters, Michelle D.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Respondent: Peters. Justin J.

Attorney: Self-Represented

Status Conference is continued to 05/02/2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3 of Superior Court of California, County of Nevada, Nevada City Branch. Please check the Court website tentative ruling page to see if a tentative ruling has been posted and if your appearance is necessary. Tentative ruling should be posted on or before 04/28/2025.
The Court notes that the following are still required:
1. FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Petitioner.
2. One of the following:
  1. FL-120 Response and FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declaration of Disclosure from Respondent, OR
  2. Agreement that Respondent has additional time to file Response. Parties may use FL14. Family Law Stipulation (Nevada County) if signed by both parties or MC-030 Declaration if only signed by Petitioner. OR
  3. FL-165 Request to Enter Default from Petitioner. If there is an agreement, Respondent must file FL-141 Declaration re: Service of Declara tion of Disclosure .
The required forms shall be served and filed no later than ten (10) days before 05/02/2025, the next Status Conference date stated in item 1.
The standard terms listed at the top of the tentative decision posting are incorporated by reference.

__________________________________________________________________

Truckee

Click on any of the links below to view the current tentative rulings in that category, or call (530) 362-4309.

These are the Court’s tentative rulings. In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and, thereafter, notify the clerk’s office by email at TRCounter@nccourt.net or by calling (530)362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day prior to the date and time set for hearing. If you do not so notify all other parties and the Court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling of the Court. See California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Personal appearances are permitted. You may also appear via video by arranging a remote Zoom appearance at the time notice of request for oral argument is made by emailing: TRCounter@nccourt.net

March 21, 2025 - Department A Case Management and Order to Show Cause Tentative Rulings

CL0001165 Victor Navarrete vs. Jennin Valentine Martinez et al
Appearances are required. Defendant JVM Landscape shall be prepared to inform the Court on the status of obtaining new counsel, and all parties shall be prepared to discuss the status of this case. Former counsel, Stoel Rives LLP, for defendants has not filed a proof of service evidencing notice was provided to defendants of the continued OSC and CMC as was previously ordered by the Court on 2/24/2025. Accordingly, the Court expects former counsel to appear unless a proof of service is filed evidencing notice was previously provided.
CL0001977 STATE FARM GENERAL INS. CO. vs. K AND J HANDYMAN SERVICES LLC et al
No appearances are required. Default has entered as to the two named defendants. CMC is continued on the Court’s own motion to May 16, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. to allow Plaintiff time to file appropriate pleadings in support of entry of default judgment which will allow the Court to determine whether a default prove up hearing needs to be set or whether judgment will enter on the pleadings. The Court notes, contrary to Plaintiff’s CMC Statement, DOE defendants have not been dismissed. In addition, the Court notes Plaintiff is required to serve the named/defaulted defendants with all moving pleadings including the proposed judgment as even defaulted parties are entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard as to any request not originally set forth in the Complaint.
CU0000780 TIMOTHY CONTRERAS, an individual, on his own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated vs. PEAK LANDSCAPE, INC. a California corporation
No appearances are required. Both parties indicate this matter has settled via private mediation. The Court sets a further case management conference for June 20, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department A to provide the parties additional time to finalize the terms of the settlement and file a request for dismissal.
CU0001014 Wells Fargo Bank, National Association vs. Mark G. Jones
No appearances are required. Summary judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff on February 26, 2025; however, Plaintiff has not yet filed an order after hearing or notice of entry of same in accordance with CRC 3.1312 nor has Plaintiff filed a proposed judgment. The Court continues the case management conference on its own motion to April 18, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department A and directs Plaintiff to file all required pleadings forthwith.
CU0001178 Gregory Ludlum vs. Joshua Terranova, Executor et al
No appearances are required. The case is at issue. Although Defendant requests a jury trial in his CMC Statement, jury fees were not timely posted and are, therefore, statutorily waived. The Court sets a court trial and related dates as follows:

Trial: December 10 - 12, 2025, 9:00 a.m. each day, Dept. A

PTC: December 2, 2025, 1:30 p.m., Dept. A

MSC: November 18, 2025, 1:30 p.m., Dept. A (See, LR 4.02)

A pre-trial order shall issue. Unless party(ies) object to this tentative ruling and appear for CMC, parties are deemed to have waived notice of trial, and asserted they will waive conflict at the MSC allowing the trial judge to conduct the MSC.

CU0001273 Edward De Jesus Jimenez vs. Inderpreet Singh et al
Appearances are required. Contrary to his CMC Statement, Plaintiff Jimenez has failed to file a responsive pleading to the November 1, 2024 cross-complaint. Cross-complainants Jaiveer Inc. and Inderpreet Singh shall show cause why they should not be sanctioned for failing to file a request for default judgment or request for dismissal as previously ordered on January 17, 2025 and again on February 21, 2025.
Additionally, the Court discharges the Order to Show Cause to all parties for failing to file a case management statement in advance of the last court date in the interest of justice. The Court admonishes the parties that failure to file fully completed case management conference statements in the future will result in sanctions being issued. The Court notes these parties either do not complete section 3 of the CMC Statement or the assertion in that section is incorrect.
CU0001285 17031 LLC, a California Limited Liability Company vs. Jacks, Joseph, et al.
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the Court continues the case management conference to April 18, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department A. Defendants Jacks and Schanfeldt shall file a responsive pleading, or Plaintiff shall file a request for default (as appropriate) or request for dismissal of defendant(s) at least one week prior to the continued case management conference.
Defendants Jacks and Schanfeldt each failed to file a case management conference statement. An OSC re sanctions is set for April 18, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. for these defendants to show cause as to why they should not be sanctioned $250.00 each for failing to timely file and serve a CMC Statement.
CU0001425 The People of the State of California, by and through the Town of Truckee; and Town of Truckee, a California Charter City; vs. Brandon Abbey et al
No appearances are required. On the Court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to April 18, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department A. An order to show cause hearing is set for the same date and time for Plaintiff to explain why the action against Defendants Brandon Abbey and Jill Abbey should not be dismissed and/or Plaintiff sanctioned for failure to file a request for default as required by the Court on February 21, 2025 and as indicated in Plaintiff’s own CMC Statement would occur. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued case management conference and OSC hearing.
CU0001473 PC-1 Developers, LLC et al vs. John Stewart Company et al
No appearances are required. The case is at issue. The Court sets jury trial and related dates as follows:

Trial: November 12 – 14 and 19 - 20, 2025, 8:30 a.m. each day, Dept. A

PTC: November 4, 2025, 1:30 p.m., Dept. A

MSC: October 14, 2025, 1:30 p.m., Dept. A (See, LR 4.02)

A pre-trial order shall issue. Unless party(ies) object to this tentative ruling and appear for CMC, parties are deemed to have waived notice of trial and asserted they will waive conflict at the MSC allowing the trial judge to conduct the MSC.

The Court notes Plaintiffs were relieved from filing a new CMC Statement due to Defendants’ failure to appear at the last CMC; however, Defendants were not so relieved. Despite this, Defendants failed to file an updated CMC Statement. Defendants are admonished such failure in the future may result in the issuance of sanctions. In addition, Defendants failed to indicate any unavailability for trial. Thus, the Court sets trial dates with the understanding Defendants are available or shall make themselves available for the indicated dates.

The order to show cause issued to Defendants is discharged in the interest of justice based on Counsel Maltz’s declaration.

CU0001498 Robin Fladeboe et al vs. Gail H Beardsley et al
No appearances are required. On its own motion, the Court continues the case management conference to April 18, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department A. Defendant Christopher Beardsley shall file a responsive pleading, or Plaintiff shall file a request for default (as appropriate) or request for dismissal of Defendant at least one week prior to the continued case management conference. Plaintiff shall serve notice of the continued CMC on Defendant Christopher Beardsley.
CU0001527 Julie Swan et al vs. James Valentine
Appearances are required by Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs Julie Swan and Allan Sword are ordered to show cause, if any, as to why this action should not be dismissed and/or Plaintiffs sanctioned for failure to timely serve the summons and complaint as directed on February 24, 2025. Should Plaintiffs fail to appear or otherwise fail to show good cause, the Court intends to dismiss the action.
CU0001558 Brian Cowart vs. Claire Marie Unis
No appearances are required. The case is at issue. The Court sets jury trial and related dates as follows:

Trial: December 10–12 and 17-18, 2025, 8:30 a.m. each day, Dept. A

PTC: November 4, 2025, 1:30 p.m., Dept. A

MSC: October 14, 2025, 1:30 p.m., Dept. A (See, LR 4.02)

CU0001588 CarMax Auto Superstores West Coast, Inc. vs. Daniel William Turner et al
No appearances are required. The Court dismissed this matter without prejudice and sanctioned Plaintiff on March 10, 2025. As such, this matter is on calendar in error and is hereby vacated.
CU0001594 Craig Shaffer vs. Thomas Roland et al
No appearances are required. Per stipulated order entered on December 2, 2024, this matter is stayed pending the outcome of mandatory binding arbitration. Per Plaintiff’s CMC Statement, arbitration has not yet occurred. Accordingly and on its own motion, the Court continues the case management conference to June 20, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department A. The parties shall file updated CMC Statements including the status of the arbitration and, if not concluded, the dates scheduled for arbitration to occur.

In addition, Defendant failed to file a CMC Statement and is admonished future failure will very likely result in the issuance of sanctions.

CU0001610 Ryanbuilt Construction vs. Graeme John Ware
No appearances are required. The Court continues the case management conference date to July 18, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department A to provide the parties additional time complete arbitration.

16. CU0001681 RANDY RYAN AGNO vs. James L Gould, IV. Etal et al
No appearances are required. On the court’s motion, the case management conference is continued to April 18, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. in Department A. An order to show cause hearing is set for the same date and time for Plaintiffs to explain why the action should not be dismissed and/or Plaintiffs sanctioned for failure to serve the summons and complaint, as ordered by the Court on February 21, 2025.

Additionally, neither Plaintiff filed a case management conference statement, and each is admonished failure to timely file and serve a CMC statement for future case management conferences will very likely subject them to sanctions. Plaintiffs shall serve notice of the continued case management conference at the same time service of the summons and complaint is effectuated.

CU0001771 Lori Cohen vs. The Board of Directors of Nevada County Charter Services Authority et al
No appearances are required. The case is at issue. The Court sets jury trial and related dates as follows:

Trial: February 18–20 and 25-27, 2026, 8:30 a.m. each day, Dept. A

PTC: February 3, 2026, 1:30 p.m., Dept. A

MSC: January 13, 2026, 1:30 p.m., Dept. A (See, LR 4.02)

CL0002143 Absolute Resolutions Investments LLC v. Kate E. Leist

Appearance by Plaintiff required to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed without prejudice. Absent good cause being shown, the Court intends to dismiss the matter.

CU0001638 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Cameron Delano, et al

Appearance required by Plaintiff to show cause as to why this matter should not be dismissed without prejudice as to unserved defendants and/or Plaintiff sanctioned in the amount of $250.00 for failure to serve all but one named defendant despite the Court continuing the OSC re dismissal for two months to allow Plaintiff additional time to serve and in light of Plaintiff obtaining an order to serve some defendants by publication two months ago.

CU0001644 Louis White PC v. Jessica Sheer, et al

No appearances required. On the Court’s own motion, the CMC is continued to April 18, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. Although the case appears to be at issue, no party filed a CMC Statement. An OSC shall issue for the same date and time as to each names party to show cause as to why each party should not be sanctioned $250.00 each for failure to timely (let alone at all) file CMC Statements in this matter.

As of May 15, 2023, the Truckee Branch will no longer be preparing and posting tentative rulings for Status Conference hearings for Family Law matters.

Court’s tentative rulings. In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and, thereafter, notify the clerk’s office by email at TRCounter@nccourt.net or by calling (530)362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day prior to the date and time set for hearing. If you do not so notify all other parties and the Court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling of the Court. Any argument is limited to five (5) minutes per party, unless the Court determines additional argument time is needed. See California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Personal appearances are permitted. You may also appear via video by arranging a remote Zoom appearance at the time notice of request for oral argument is made by emailing: TRCounter@nccourt.net

March 24, 2025 Department A Law and Motion Tentative Rulings

1. CL0001451 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. vs. Michael Henry

Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Set Aside Dismissal and Enter Judgment Pursuant to CCP section 664.6 is granted as prayed.

2. CL0001909 Cavalry SPV I LLC as assignee of Citibank N.A. vs. Concepcion

Appearance required by trial counsel for OSC re Dismissal. There is still not proof of service evidencing service of the summons and complaint on any defendant despite this matter pending since August 2, 2024 and despite the Court now twice continuing the OSC at request of Plaintiff. Absent good cause being shown, the Court intends to dismiss this case without prejudice.

3. UHG I LLC vs. Kerri Layman

Appearance required OSC re dismissal and sanctions. There is still not proof of service evidencing service of the summons and complaint on the sole named defendant despite this matter pending since September 3, 2024 and despite the Court continuing the OSC at request of Plaintiff. In addition, on January 13, 2025, counsel for Plaintiff asserted a motion for change of venue would be filed and calendared for March 24, 2025. Such has not occurred. Absent good cause being shown, the Court intends to dismiss this case without prejudice.

4. The People of the State of California by and through the Town of Truckee vs. Michael Junemann
Appearance required by Plaintiff for prove up hearing. Defendant may appear if desired.

5. CU0001710 Damon Barnett vs. Mills Roofing, Inc.
Defendant Jeremy Mills’ unopposed Demurrer to the Complaint is dropped as moot. This moving defendant was dismissed from the action on February 18, 2025.
Defendant Mills Roofing Inc.’s unopposed Demurrer to the Complaint based on jurisdiction is overruled. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Complaint adequately allege sufficient facts which support a finding of minimum contacts with the State of California exist as to this Defendant to uphold jurisdiction.

However, Defendant Mills Roofing Inc.’s unopposed Demurrer to the Complaint based on the arbitration clause is sustained without leave to amend. There is a binding arbitration clause between Plaintiff and this moving defendant/employer which specifically includes all claims alleged herein. The Court retains jurisdiction over this moving corporate defendant in order to enter any judgment stemming from the outcome of the binding arbitration.

Defendants’ Demurrer to each individual cause of action is dropped as moot, given the ruling set forth above as to binding arbitration.

No further hearings shall be set forth in this matter. The case is dismissed, with the court retaining jurisdiction over enforcement of any binding arbitration award.

6. CU0001829 In Re Baldomera Rojas Cabera

There is no proof of publication in the Court’s file. Should Petitioner have proof of publication, they may appear with same at the hearing, otherwise, the Court will deny the petition without prejudice.

7. CU0001871 In Re Anna Raquel McGee

8. CU0001913 In the Matter of Graeme John Ware
The Petition for Release of Mechanic’s Lien is denied without prejudice. There is no proof of service of the Petition and Notice of Hearing as required by Civil Code section 8486.

These are the Court’s tentative rulings. In order to argue at the hearing, you must notify the parties and, thereafter, notify the clerk’s office by email at TRCounter@nccourt.net or by calling (530)362-4309 by 4:00 p.m. the court day prior to the date and time set for hearing. If you do not so notify all other parties and the Court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling of the Court. Any argument is limited to five (5) minutes per party, unless the Court determines additional argument time is needed. See California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3.

Personal appearances are permitted. You may also appear via video by arranging a remote Zoom appearance at the time notice of request for oral argument is made by emailing: TRCounter@nccourt.net

March 24, 2025 - Department A Probate Tentative Rulings

P01-13442 In the Matter of ANTHONY M PAGANO

The 12^th Accounting is approved. The Review Hearing is continued on the court’s own motion to April 14, 2025, at 1:30 pm in Dept. A, for receipt of the court investigation review report. Conservator is directed to contact Quest Investigations forthwith for a status of this report. No appearances are required.

PR0000197 In Re Kalama-Arteaga, Makaio Likeke

On the Court’s own motion, the guardianship of the person is hereby terminated. The minor has been adopted. No accounting is due. No further hearings are set. No appearances are required.

PR0000717 In the Matter of the Brandt Family Trust 1995 Exemption Trust

The Final Distribution is granted as prayed. No appearances are required.

PR0000718 In the Matter of Andy Rune Gustavson

The Final Distribution is granted as prayed. No appearances are required.

TP21-7890 In the Matter of CHRISTINE LIPNOSKY

The Review Hearing is continued on the Court’s own motion to April 14, 2025, at 1:30 pm in Dept. A, for receipt of the Court Investigation Review Report. Conservator is directed to contact Quest Investigations forthwith for a status of this report. No appearances are required.
PR0000715 In the Matter of Frank Stratton

The Petition to Administer Estate is granted as prayed. No appearances are required.

Judicial Branch of California

Tentative Rulings

Nevada City

Truckee

Was this helpful?

Tentative Rulings

Law & Motion

Probate

Case Management Conferences

Guardianships

Family Law

Case Management Conferences

Family Law

Law and Motion

Probate