- Online Services Pay Fines, Transcripts...
- Forms & Filing Forms, Fee Schedule...
- Self-Help Self-Rep, Info, FAQs...
- Divisions Civil, Criminal, Family...
- General Info Local Rules, ADA, Maps...
TENTATIVE RULINGS – FAMILY LAW DEPT. 21
LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR
Friday July 19, 2019 at 9:30 a.m.
COURTROOM #21 – Hon. Lawrence E. Ornell
(3055 Cleveland Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA)
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) 521-6723 by 4:00 p.m. on Thursday July 18, 2019. Any party requesting an appearance must notify all other opposing parties of their intent to appear.
LAW & MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS
Judge Lawrence Ornell
July 19, 2019
The Court adopts the recommendations of Family Court Services mediator. The request to change venue to Sacramento County is Granted, effective upon the payment of necessary fees. For tax purposes Jashawn shall be a dependent of father.
Petitioner Juan Estrada’s unopposed motion to enforce judgment and for attorney fees is granted. Petitioner and Respondent Renee Estrada separated on January 1, 2012; a judgment of dissolution was entered on May 12, 2014. The Judgment incorporated a Marital Settlement Agreement (MSA) which divided the parties’ property and legal obligations. In this motion, Petitioner contends that section 10.6 of the MSA required Respondent to pay the parties’ obligations for the 2013 Joint Tax Return. Petitioner avers that in March, 2016 he received notice that Respondent had not paid the parties’ 2013 tax obligations. (See Exhibit B to the RFO.) Petitioner further contends that he received a notice from the California Franchise Tax Board also indicating that the parties owed a state tax obligation. (See Exhibit C to the RFO.) Pursuant to the FTB notice, the FTB levied $11,041.33 from Petitioner’s JP Morgan Chase bank account. Respondent agreed to reimburse Petitioner for the amount levied by paying him 32 payments of $250. Petitioner asserts that Respondent made payments in the amount of $8,000; and refused to pay any more.
Petitioner contends that he received another invoice from the IRS in November, 2018, indicating a balance owed of $34,616.23. Petitioner contends he engaged a firm to help him with these tax obligations—Petitioner avers that he paid this firm $5,274.72. By way of this motion, Petitioner seeks an order requiring Respondent to pay the tax obligations per the MSA, and to reimburse Petitioner for his out of pocket expenses and attorney fees.
The RFO has not drawn opposition. Notwithstanding entry of judgment in the action, the court retains jurisdiction over the parties and the litigation to enforce the settlement pursuant to § 664.6 until it is fully performed.
The request to waive fees is Granted.