TENTATIVE RULINGS – FAMILY LAW DEPT. 20
Thursday June 9 2022, at 1:30 p.m.
Commissioner Paul J. Lozada
(3055 Cleveland Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA)
PLEASE NOTE: If you appear remotely for this hearing please use the following Zoom information.
To appear online via Zoom please use the following link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82972233880 Passcode: 026215
To appear by phone:
Call: +1 669 900 6833
Meeting ID: 829 7223 3880 Passcode: 026215
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 you must contact the Judicial Assistant by telephone at (707) 521-6732 by 4:00 p.m. on the day prior to the hearing. Any party requesting an appearance must notify all other parties of their intent to appear.
Hon. Paul J. Lozada
Thursday June 9, 2022, at 1:30 p.m.
SFL086920 FOGG/FOGG DISSOLUTION
This matter comes on calendar for Petitioner/Husband Ricky FOGG’s unopposed April 19, 2022, motion for five orders regarding the marital property (“Skillman Property”).
Specifically, Husband requests the following orders: (1) Order for the immediate listing of the property for sale; (2) Order directing Respondent/Wife Mitzi FOGG to sign listing documents; (3) Order appointing Elisor if Wife refuses to sign the listing documents; (4) Order granting Husband and his work crew access to property (upon 48-hour written notice to Wife) to make necessary repairs (specifically, the three necessary repairs that were identified in a March 2022 court order); and (5) Order granting Husband access to property (with 48-hour written notice to Wife) to inspect the residence and its contents of the property to ensure that Wife is not damaging any community or separate property.
Subsequent to the filing of the motion, the parties entered into a stipulation and order on April 25, 2022, regarding the sale of the property. The Court was informed that the pending motion would still go forward, however.
This Court finds that the stipulation renders MOOT the request for orders #1-3. The Court further finds that the request for orders #4-5 remain in dispute even after the stipulation.
Husband’s request for order #4 (access to property to complete the three necessary repairs identified by a prior court order) is GRANTED. Both Husband and his work crew shall have access to the property (both the interior and exterior) to make the three necessary repairs identified in a prior court order, provided that 48-hour written advanced notice is given.
Husband’s request for order #5 (access to property to ensure that Wife is not damaging community or separate property) is DENIED. Instead, the Court issues the following orders which the Court believes will satisfy any concerns about potential damage to community or separate property: (1) Wife is ordered not to destroy or damage any community property or Husband’s separate property without Husband’s consent; (2) if Husband wants to retrieve any of his separate property from the Skillman property, the parties shall agree on a mutually agreeable time and place for the return of such property; and (3) the parties shall give the listing agent reasonable access to the property for purposes of inspecting the property to ensure that it is in proper condition for sale.
Moving party shall prepare an order consistent with this ruling.
It is so ORDERED.