Family Law Tentative Rulings - Courtroom 21

The following Tentative Rulings will become the ruling of the Court unless a party desires to be heard. If you desire to appear and present oral argument as to any motion, it will be necessary for you to contact the Judicial Assistant by telephone at (707) 521-6604 by 4:00 p.m. on the day before the hearing. Any party requesting an appearance must notify all other opposing parties of their intent to appear.

PLEASE NOTE: If argument is requested in this matter you may appear in person or remotely via Zoom. To appear via Zoom please see the Zoom information below. 

To appear online via Zoom please use the following link:

• Join the Sonoma County Court Zoom hearing
• Passcode: 876992

To appear via Zoom by phone:

• Call: +1 669-254-5252
• Enter the Meeting ID: 160-223-6856
• Passcode: 876992

The following tentative rulings will become the ruling of the Court unless a party desires to be heard.  If you desire to appear and present oral argument as to any motion, it will be necessary for you to contact the department’s Judicial Assistant by telephone at (707) 521 - 6836 by 4:00 p.m. on the day before the hearing. Any party requesting an appearance must notify all other opposing parties/counsel of their intent to appear.

1. 25FL01237, Carter v. Schelbrack

Motion GRANTED in part, DENIED in part, RESERVED in part, and CONTINUED on one issue to May 7, 2026 at 9:00am in Department 21.

 Petitioner filed this action for dissolution of marriage without minor children on June 16, 2025.  The petition seeks confirmation of separate property and contends that there are no known community property issues to resolve.  It also seeks to terminate the authority to award spousal support.  He also filed an FL-160 separate property declaration.  

Respondent in her response also seeks confirmation of separate property, asserts that there are no known issues of community property to address, and seeks a termination of the court’s authority to award spousal support to either party. 

 On November 7, 2025, Petitioner filed a form FL-141 declaration of service (“Service Declaration”) regarding service of his FL-140 Preliminary Declaration of Disclosure (“PDD”), showing that he had served the PDD on Respondent.  He also filed a separate proof of service showing service of the PDD, the service declaration, FL-142 Schedule of Assets and Debts (“SAD”), and his FL-150 Income and Expense Declaration (“IED”). 

Motion

In his Request for Order (“RFO”) and Motion to Compel Financial Disclosure and Production of Documents, Petitioner moves the court to compel Respondent to provide an FL-140 PDD, FL-141 Service Declaration, FL-142 SAD, and FL-150 IED.  He also seeks an order compelling Respondent to produce documents regarding a storage unit (the “Storage Unit”) which he alleges both parties use, including an original lease or contract, billings statements and payment history, access logs, and notice of sale, abandonment or disposal of property.  In addition, he seeks an order authorizing him to obtain records of the Storage Unit from the facility.  He requests an order compelling Respondent to provide documentation of state-issued public benefits received using the name of Petitioner’s child (“Child”).  Finally, he seeks monetary sanctions under Family Code section 2107. 

 Respondent opposes the motion.  She claims that Petitioner is seeking “payback” for expenses incurred in the marriage and she contests his position on financial issues; Petitioner ceased paying for the Storage Unit and already took his personal property from it; and she disputes Petitioner’s claims regarding his Child.  She makes other assertions regarding her health, harassment, and additional issues regarding their relationship.  She also asserts that she seeks no assets or support. 

Applicable Authority

 According to the Family Law Rules of the California Rules of Court (“CRC”) 5.2(d), and Family Code section 210, provisions applicable to civil actions generally apply to proceedings under the Family Code unless otherwise provided.  This includes the rules applicable to civil actions in the California Rules of Court and the Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”), and specifically proceedings pursuant to the Civil Discovery Act set forth at CCP section 2016.010, et seq.  See, e.g., In re Marriage of Boblitt (2014) 223 Cal.App. 4th 1004, at 1022 (discovery).

 Applicable authority requires disclosure of income and expenses, as well as assets.  Marriage of Feldman (2007) 153 Cal.App. 4th 1470, 1476-1477.  CRC 5.92, governing requests for court order and responsive declarations in family law proceedings, requires parties to complete and file an IED in actions where a party seeks orders regarding, among others, property or finances.  It states, in pertinent part,

(b) Request for order; required forms and filing procedure

…

(2) Except in actions under Family Code section 6344, in which a party seeks an order for attorney's fees and costs, when a party seeks orders for spousal or domestic partner support, attorney's fees and costs, or other orders relating to the parties’ property or finances:

(A) The party must complete an Income and Expense Declaration (form FL-150) and file it with the Request for Order (form FL-300)….

Fam.Code section 2100(c) states, with emphasis added,

a full and accurate disclosure of all assets and liabilities in which one or both parties have or may have an interest must be made in the early stages of a proceeding for dissolution of marriage or legal separation of the parties, regardless of the characterization as community or separate, together with a disclosure of all income and expenses of the parties. Moreover, each party has a continuing duty to immediately, fully, and accurately update and augment that disclosure to the extent there have been any material changes so that at the time the parties enter into an agreement for the resolution of any of these issues, or at the time of trial on these issues, each party will have a full and complete knowledge of the relevant underlying facts.

Unless otherwise excused, parties in actions under the Family Code must provide preliminary and final declarations of disclosure meeting the requirements set forth in Fam. Code sections 2103, 2104, and 2105.  If a party fails to provide such a disclosure, or fails to provide the required information, the other party may in a timely manner request compliance and, if the party still fails to comply, may then bring a motion to compel.  Fam. Code section 2107.

 Fam. Code section 2104 sets forth the requirements for serving preliminary declarations of disclosure.  Subdivision (a) requires each party to serve the other with a preliminary declaration of disclosure unless excused by court order for good cause pursuant to Fam. Code section 2107, or when service is not required pursuant to Section 2110.  Fam. Code section 2014(b) states that a party is not to file the declaration of disclosure with the court absent a court order but each party must file with the court proof of service of the preliminary declaration of disclosure.  Fam. Code section 2104 requires the service to take place within the time period set forth in subdivision (f).  Subdivision (f) requires petitioner to serve the PDD either concurrently with the petition or within 60 days of filing the petition. Respondent must serve the PDD either with the response or within 60 days of filing the response.

Fam. Code section 2107 governs the failure to comply with the requirements for preliminary declarations of disclosure set forth in section 2104.  According to subdivision (c), in addition to other remedies where a party fails to comply with disclosure requirements, the court “shall… impose money sanctions against the noncomplying party. Sanctions shall be in an amount sufficient to deter repetition of the conduct or comparable conduct, and shall include reasonable attorney’s fees, costs incurred, or both, unless the court finds that the noncomplying party acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.”

Discussion

Respondent’s Opposition

Preliminarily, the court notes that Respondent’s opposition does not address the issues presented in this motion.  She makes a range of claims and arguments regarding the parties’ relationship, Petitioner’s conduct during and after the relationship, and Petitioner’s motivations.  While these contentions may potentially be relevant to ultimate determinations, they have no bearing on this motion.  In this motion, the court is solely to consider whether to order Respondent to produce the documents and information which Petitioner seeks, which he sets forth specifically in his moving papers.

Compelling the PDD and Service Declaration

Petitioner is entitled to service of Respondent’s FL-140 PDD and FL-141 Service Declaration as set forth in the law above.  Petitioner shows that he served his PDD and that Respondent has not served hers.  However, in his evidence, including his Attachment 9 - Supporting Declaration of Jamall Carter (“Carter Dec.”), he does not show that he actually requested the PDD from Respondent.  Should Petitioner demonstrate that he previously asked Respondent, pursuant to Fam. Code sections 2104 and 2107, to provide the PDD, the court will grant the motion on this point.  If Petitioner fails to show this, the court will continue the matter for further consideration to allow Petitioner an opportunity to make the request and to allow Respondent an opportunity to comply by serving Petitioner with her FL-140 PDD and serving and filing a FL-141 Service Declaration. The motion is hereby CONTINUED on this issue to May 7, 2026 at 9:00am in Department 21.

Income and Expense Declaration

In this case, neither party seeks spousal support but both parties are seeking orders regarding property and finances.  The requests are limited, but they put financial matters at issue nonetheless.  As explained above, a party is required in such proceedings to provide an income and expense declaration, Form FL-150, as well as a PDD.  Respondent has failed to do so.  The court GRANTS the motion on this point.

Other Records, Documents, and Information

Petitioner also asks the court to order Respondent to provide a range of other documents and information, along with an order allowing him to obtain the Storage Unit records from the facility directly.   

With respect to obtaining records and information from the storage facility himself, no court order may be necessary should Petitioner be listed on the Storage Unit account.  If he is not, or the facility refuses to provide the records or information, Petitioner must first attempt to obtain the records and information from the facility through the methods applicable to subpoenas pursuant to CCP sections CCP section 1985.3, 1987.1, 2020.010, 2020.020, 2020.210, 2020.220, 2025.480. Personal service of a deposition subpoena obligates any resident of California to appear, testify and produce whatever documents or things are specified in the subpoena; and to appear in any proceedings to enforce discovery. CCP section 2020.220(c).  If the recipient of the subpoena refuses or fails to comply, the subpoenaing party may then move the court to compel the nonparty to comply with the subpoena. CCP sections 1987.1; 2025.480.         

 With respect to the documents and information which Petitioner seeks from Respondent, he similarly must first attempt to obtain these through discovery methods pursuant to the Discovery Act, starting at CCP section 2016.010.  These methods may include, among others, interrogatories pursuant to CCP sections 2030 through 2030.410 and requests for production or inspection at CCP sections 2031 through 2031.510.  As set forth in those provisions, Petitioner may then seek an order that Respondent comply, or for other authorized relief, in the event that Respondent fails to comply with his requests.  Until Petitioner complies with those procedures, the court has no authority simply to order a party to produce information or documents. 

 The court in this order is not ruling on the validity of Petitioner’s need for the documents or information.  Petitioner presents potentially valid bases for obtaining these, particularly in his Carter Dec., but until Petitioner seeks these by the proper methods, the court cannot address his requests. 

 The court DENIES the motion with respect to these requests, without prejudice to Petitioner seeking the documents or information by complying with the applicable discovery methods and, if necessary, bringing the appropriate motions to compel discovery.  

Sanctions

 Petitioner seeks monetary sanctions and, as discussed above, such an award is mandatory unless the other party acted with substantial justification or other circumstances would make the award unjust.  Here, as explained above, the court at this point finds the motion persuasive as to the IED but finds that there is insufficient information to grant the motion as to the PDD while the motion is improper as to the various other discovery sought.  The court is also concerned that Respondent has simply failed to understand the procedures properly and that her failure to comply may be due to innocent error.  At this time, the court RESERVES on the issue of sanctions and will not issue a ruling regarding sanctions.  The court will instead consider the issue of sanctions at a future hearing after Petitioner has satisfied the requirements for the PDD request as discussed above. The court also notes that since the parties are self-represented, this will limit any such awards sought here because the parties are not able to recover sanctions for attorney’s fees.

Conclusion

Petitioner shall prepare and serve a proposed order consistent with this tentative ruling within five days of the date set for argument of this matter. Opposing party shall inform the preparing party of objections as to form, if any, or whether the form of order is approved, within five days of receipt of the proposed order. The preparing party shall submit the proposed order and any objections to the court in accordance with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312.

2. SFL081282, Martinez-Avalos v. Avalos Camerena
   Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents #1 DROPPED. Respondent/moving party filed the Request for Order on 1/23/2026. A hearing was scheduled for 3/13/2026. The tentative ruling indicated the matter would be continued to 4/16/2026 due to a lack of service of the motion. There being no request for oral argument, the Court adopted the tentative ruling and continued the hearing. No proof of service has been filed to date. The matter is hereby dropped from calendar.
    
3. SFL081561 Audiat-Rewick v. Rewick
   APPEARANCES REQUIRED.
    
4. SFL087336, Muller v. Tabi
   Motion to Deem Respondent a Vexatious Litigant CONTINUED to July 2, 2026 at 9am in Department 21.
    
5. SFL087517, Culhane v. Culhane
   Motion To Be Relieved As Counsel by Attorney Conway GRANTED.