Tuolumne — Probate Notes for March 13, 2026

Source: https://www.tuolumne.courts.ca.gov/system/files/general/pb_d5_03132026.pdf

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

1 PR12436 Estate of Joyce Bratcher 03/21/2024

Kristi Allen Pro Per

Joyce Bratcher

Review Hearing - Report - Probate Code 12200

FURTHER

03/21/2024 Petition File Tracking 02/11/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.”
Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode: 123456].
All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to
decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due notice thereof, parties
are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

Petitioner has yet to file §12251 petition. Court intends to dismiss petition nevertheless, but without a discharge of petitioner.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

2 PR12629 Estate of Michelle Elam 04/08/2025

Danielle Tilbury Attorney: Gary Dambacher

Joseph Batto Attorney: Rodney
Augustine
Kristine Cordero Attorney: Gary Dambacher

Final Distribution Hearing

02/23/2026 Final Distribution File Tracking 04/14/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.”
Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode: 123456].
All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to
decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due notice thereof, parties are
deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

No appearance is necessary.

Before the Court this day is the petition to approve the proposed estate distribution, complete with reimbursements, a quasi creditor claim, statutory fees and extraordinary fees. After careful review, this Court concludes that the proposed distribution shall be approved in all respects. Court intends to sign the proposed order filed therewith.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

3 PR12718 In Re: The Harry A. McCune, JR. Living Trust 10/14/2025

Kelsey McCune Cossel Attorney: Jason Pink

Petition Hearing

FURTHER - confirm trust assets

10/14/2025 Petition File Tracking 10/16/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.”
Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode: 123456].
All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to
decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due notice thereof, parties are
deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

This is the continued hearing on a petition to declare APN 599-111-09-00 and APN 500-141-12-00 assets of the Harry A, McCune Jr Living Trust dtd 12/01/2012. The trust is presently irrevocable following the passing of the sole settlor.

A trial court may make a transfer of assets into an irrevocable trust beyond the life of the last settlor, pursuant to §856, if the last settlor presently owns the asset in question, the settlor created a trust to hold said asset, and there exists sufficient evidence to find by a preponderance of the evidence that the settlor intended the asset to be held in that trust but failed to make a legal record transfer by mistake, surprise, excusable neglect or innocent omission. See, e.g., Carne v. Worthington (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 548, 558-560; Ukkestad v. RBS Asset Finance, Inc. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 156, 160-161; Estate of Powell (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 1434, 1443; Estate of Heggstad (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 943, 950951. In this case, both the trust instrument itself, and the attached Schedule of Assets, specifically reference both parcels. Moreover, the settlor actually prepared and caused to be recorded quit claim deeds for both properties transferring them into the subject trust, though each deed contained an error in the APN. This Court has no trouble concluding that the subject properties were intended to be held in trust, and that the failure to vest was only by decedent’s mistake. The transfer can and should be made. However, two issues remain.

First, decedent passed away in 2013, and there is no evidence provided with the petition that the

properties are currently held in decedent’s name. Petitioner offers an email from the county assessor stating that APN 500-141-12-00 is still in decedent’s name, but nothing with regard to APN 599-111-09-00.

Second, there was a concern regarding venue since the properties themselves are in San Diego County. In a trust proceeding, venue exists where the administration actually takes place (§§ 17002(a), §17005(a)(1)). Petitioner affirms that she lives in, and handles the properties from, Tuolumne County. However, this is not (yet) a trust case. The properties are (presumably) in decedent’s individual name, making this an estate case subject to §7051, to wit: venue is proper where the decedent was domiciled. Of course, venue can be waived so if no party comes forward at the hearing to challenge this Court’s exercise of venue here, the matter will proceed vis-à-vis APN 500-141-12-00 (only).

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

4 PR12667 In re The Robert and Rosamond Sagaser Trust dated March 9, 2005 06/23/2025

Joseph Warren Sagaser Attorney: Nicholas Yonano

Matthew Sagaser Attorney: Carrie McKernan

Review Hearing

status

06/23/2025 Petition File Tracking 06/24/2025 Gloria Doehring

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is
necessary.” Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode:
123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal. Const.
art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due notice
thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

No appearance is necessary.

By request of the parties, the hearing is continued to 05/08/2026 @ 8:30 a.m. Notice is waived.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

5 FL16161 Michael Montoya vs. Alexia Ragan 07/02/2019

Michael Montoya Pro Per

Alexia Ragan Pro Per

County of Tuolumne Attorney: Dept. of Child
Support Services
Michael Montoya Pro Per

Alexia Ragan

Review Hearing - Child Custody/Visitation

Special Set, Mothers Schedule
OSC Hearing - Child Custody

TECO denied

08/16/2019 Judgment/Order File Tracking 03/16/2022 From Court-Civil Case types Other Cases FL16116

Related to CV68003: New wife filed CHRO against bio mom for stalking and threatening and showing up to the residence unannounced and unwelcome. Also claimed that respondent made “fake accounts” and tried to get her fired from job at PetSmart. CH-TRO granted. After evidentiary hearing, CHRO was denied.

This is a parentage action. In the summer of 2020, orders were made in which the parties were awarded joint legal custody, and Father was awarded sole physical custody of their 1 child. Mother has previously requested move-away with the child to several different locations, including a possible move to Oregon and a move into a “group home” where Mother was then residing. Although the court had concerns about Father’s alcohol use, Father retained primary and Mother was awarded only Sunday visits (8am – 4pm).

On 01/12/2026, Mother filed an RFO/TECO advising that the child called her on a Tuesday and asked her to come get him because Father was in a fight with Emily and the child did not want to be present for the DV incident. Although the TRO was denied for want of evidence, Mother has since filed lots of screenshots of text messages seeming to show that Father is aggressive with his new wife, does not want the new wife watching the subject child, and that the home the child lives in is full of DV.

On 01/22/2026, the parties stipulated that Mother shall have visitation from Thursdays at 6PM to Sundays at 6PM.

On 02/06/2026, the parties stipulated that Mother would have visitation Tues-Thurs (??) {Minute Order correct?}

On 02/13/2026, father filed new TECO claiming that bio mom was out with BF who got into fight with others (not in front of child) and that new BF is DV trouble.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

6 PR12737 The Estate of Dora Mae Hartman 12/05/2025

Robert Anthony Hartman Attorney: Yet Not Entered

Dora Mae Hartman

Review Hearing

Letters of Admin/Publication status.

12/05/2025 Petition File Tracking 12/19/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.”
Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:

https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode: 123456]. All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due notice thereof, parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

No appearance is necessary.

In as much as there is still no proof of publication in the court file (see §8124), and no proof of having given notice of this hearing, Court intends to continue the hearing to 04/24/2026 at 8:30 a.m. Clerk to give notice.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

7 PR12601 The Estate of Laurie Ann Rock 02/19/2025

Laurie Rock

Robert G. Rock Attorney: Timothy Trujillo

Final Distribution Hearing

FURTHER

02/19/2025 Petition File Tracking 03/17/2025 High Density

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.”
Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode: 123456].
All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to
decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due notice thereof, parties are
deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

This is the continued hearing on a petition to settle the account and approve the proposed distribution of the estate. This Court took the liberty of identifying several anomalies in advance of the prior hearing, to wit: 1. The fee basis is overstated by $5,000 because a “seller credit” on the sale of the real property is the equivalent of a further loss on the sale; 2. Extraordinary fees to run a spousal by-pass petition should be borne by petitioner alone because those fees are not “to the advantage of the estate [or] in the best interests of the persons who are interested in the estate.” Probate Code §10811(c)(3).

This Court granted potential objectors leave to file opposition through February 20, and no opposition has been received. The objectors were primarily concerned about line-item entries and an allegedly missing trust instrument. Without further elaboration, and with the recent correction offered by petitioner, it seems that the petition must now be approved as prayed.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

8 PR12745 The Estate of Matthew Beauchamp 01/21/2026

David L Beauchamp Attorney: Carrie McKernan

Matthew Beauchamp

Letters of Administration

01/21/2026 Petition File Tracking 01/21/2026 LP Labels Needed

Probate Notes are not tentative rulings. Parties and counsel are expected to appear for the hearings unless this note indicates that “no appearance is necessary.”
Unless a personal appearance is required, all participants may appear via Zoom without first securing Court permission using this link:
https://tuolumne-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615813960?pwd=NTRMT0NwMDg5cnlYdzZ6VnBXWWFsUT09. [Meeting ID: 161 581 3960; Passcode: 123456].
All matters set for hearing in Department 5 are presumptively assigned to that department for all purposes. Parties retain the right under Cal. Const. art VI §21 to
decline consent to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem. By participating in the first hearing, or electing not to attend after due notice thereof, parties are
deemed to have stipulated to the Commissioner serving as a Judge Pro Tem for the entire case. See CRC 2.816.

No appearance is necessary.

Before the Court this day is a petition to open probate and issue Letters of Administration with IAEA authority to the decedent’s sole next of kin. Publication is complete, as is the nonresident registration. Court intends to grant petition, issue the letters and set 8800/12200 review dates. As there is no proposed order on file, issuance of the letters may be delayed.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

9 FL12701 Krystal Anderson and Dominick Anderson 04/07/2014

Dominick Anderson Pro Per

Krystal Anderson Pro Per

Victoria Anderson Attorney: Christine Parraz

Dominick Anderson Pro Per

Krystal Anderson

Motion Hearing - Child Custody/Visitation

Trailing PR12690

05/23/2023 OSC Application File Tracking 12/22/2025 High Density Other Cases CRM45312 FL14643 PR12690

See #19

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

10 FL19338 Jodi Bermea vs. Wesley Arechiga 12/19/2025

Jodi Bermea Pro Per

Wesley Arechiga Attorney: Nathan Nutting

Review Hearing

Mediation Review

12/19/2025 OSC Application File Tracking 12/24/2025 High Density Other Cases FL19340

Mediation unsuccessful.

Related to: FL18363 (DVRO based on TCSD arrest; dropped with quasi-SPCO) FL19119 (DVRO dismissed) FL19340 (new Title IV-D)

On 11/19/2025, Mother filed a DVRO seeking protection for herself and their 1 young child based on Father’s erratic violent mood swings, suicidal and homicidal ideations. Mother was granted DV-TRO and Father was directed to destroy all intimate photos of her. He was ordered to have no contact and stay away from both absent court authorization. Father is pointlessly profane and rude to Mother in texts in FL19119.

The paternal GF filed a FL-324(NP).

On 02/26/2026, parties agreed to limit communication through third-party app, to drop DVRO in favor of SPCO, and to grant Father parenting time on Wednesday evenings and alternate weekends. (Not sure of precise times.)

Set for trial or continue working through long-term resolution?

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

11 PR12235 Conservatorship of Bradley Carl Sturm 02/01/2023

Gordon Sturm Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Bradley Carl Sturm

Jennifer Galindo Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Venessa Lines Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Review Hearing - Investigator Report - PR Code 1850

02/01/2023 Petition File Tracking 04/12/2024 High Density

Court is awaiting investigative report.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

12 PR11639 Conservatorship of Jay Kristopher Highfill 01/11/2019

Jay Kristopher Highfill

Jarrett Highfill Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Kristen Highfill Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Review Hearing - Investigator Report - PR Code 1850

01/11/2019 Petition File Tracking 04/12/2024 High Density

Court is awaiting investigative report.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

13 PR10409 Guardianship of Alexis M. Jones 12/22/2008

Benjamin Franklin Denson, III Pro Per

Alexis Monet Lucky Denson

Farida Lucky Denson Pro Per

Review Hearing

terminate by operation of law - minor turns 18 3/13/26

12/22/2008 Petition File Tracking 04/24/2024 High Density Other Cases CV55808

No appearance is necessary.

There being no petition on file to extend the guardianship beyond the ward’s 18th birthday, and the ward having now reached the age of majority, this guardianship is terminated by operation of law.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

14 PR11900 Guardianship of Allyson Dawn Solano 01/28/2021

Laura E. Young Pro Per

Harrison K.F.B. Young Pro Per

Allyson Dawn Solano

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

01/28/2021 Petition File Tracking 01/28/2021 Petition 04/12/2024 High Density

Having considered the CG-251 with attachments, this Court is obliged to inform the guardians that “a guardian may at any time file with the court a petition tendering the resignation of the guardian. The court shall allow such resignation when it appears proper, to take effect at such time as the court shall fix, and may make any order as may be necessary to deal with the guardianship during the period prior to the appointment of a new guardian.” Probate Code §2660.

The guardians indicate that a guardianship remains necessary, but that they are unwilling to continue as guardians. Q: Is ward currently living with guardians (Para 2)? Q: Why is bio dad unable to resume his role as parent? Q: What efforts have been made to locate bio mom?

Court to direct investigator to locate parents so that process to terminate guardianship can commence.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

15 PR12041 Guardianship of Angelique Cimmeron Cesco 01/10/2022

Emily Flosi Pro Per

Travis Flosi Pro Per

Angelique Cimmeron Cesco Pro Per

Chenoa Berg Pro Per

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

01/10/2022 Petition File Tracking 04/12/2024 High Density

No appearance is necessary.

The Court, having received and received the GC-251 with attachments, intends to find by a preponderance of the evidence that the guardianship remains necessary/convenient and that the guardians continue to serve the ward’s best interests. Court intends to set annual review date.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

16 PR12697 Guardianship of Imani Athena Mathiesen 09/05/2025

Lloyd Mathiesen Pro Per

Whitney Mathiesen Pro Per

Imani Athena Mathiesen

Appoint Guardian - Person

FURTHER

09/05/2025 Petition File Tracking 09/08/2025 High Density

See #21 and FL19378 (no RFO yet)

This was a “placeholder” petition to establish a guardianship while the parents were incarcerated. There has since been a substantial change of circumstances. This petition will likely be dismissed.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

17 PR12496 Guardianship of Keani Lima, et al. 07/16/2024

Maria Dolores Troncoso Pro Per

Keani Dolores Lima Attorney: Nathan Nutting

Kira Elizebeth Lima Attorney: Nathan Nutting

Joseph K Lima III Pro Per

Review Hearing

Therapist report?

07/16/2024 Petition File Tracking 07/16/2024 Petition 05/20/2025 High Density

Related to #23.

At the previous trial setting conference, minor’s counsel brokered a settlement agreement as follows:

o Establishing temporary guardianship over both wards o Residence of wards to be with petitioner (maternal grandmother) o Wards and bio dad to attend reunification counseling

Review hearing today to assess counseling. Letters and order do not have expiration date. Temporary guardianship to be extended.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

18 PR12347 Guardianship of Louis David Leonard 10/25/2023

Norene M. Leonard Pro Per

Lawrence F. Leonard Pro Per

Louis David Leonard

Jacqueline Grandstaff Pro Per

Review Hearing - Guardian Rept-Probate Code 1513.2

10/25/2023 Petition File Tracking 09/26/2024 High Density

No appearance is necessary.

The Court, having received and received the GC-251 with attachments, intends to find by a preponderance of the evidence that the guardianship remains necessary/convenient and that the guardians continue to serve the ward’s best interests. Court intends to set annual review date.

Regarding the request to have “papers” confirming authority to act on behalf of the ward, the Letters issued 03/15/2024 are the “papers” needed. See Probate Code §2310. Even if the recipient would prefer a Letter to be dated more recent, that does not alter the authority to act. See Probate Code §§ 670 and 8501; in accord, Curran v. Kennedy (1891) 89 Cal. 98, 100-101.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

19 PR12690 Guardianship of Victoria Leandra Anderson 08/18/2025

Chelsea Van Atta Pro Per

Victoria Anderson Attorney: Christine Parraz

Appoint Guardian

FURTHER

08/18/2025 Petition File Tracking 08/18/2025 Petition 10/22/2025 Cassandra Vigardt Other Cases FL14643 FL12701

Initial report from new minor’s counsel.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

20 PR11901 Guardianship of Nathan, Austin and Jordan Shrader 01/27/2021

Robert Patania Pro Per

Nathan Shrader Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Austin Shrader Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Jordan Shrader Attorney: Jennifer Lothert

Robin Grove Pro Per

Johnathan Shrader Pro Per

Motion Hearing - Visitation

FURTHER modification

03/18/2025 Termination of Guardianship File Tracking 03/24/2025 High Density

On 03/28/2025, the parties agreed that Father would be entitled to visits with the boys as follows: o Alternate weekends Sat 10am Sun 2pm o 4 hrs around each child’s bday o 4 hrs around his own bday

On 01/02/2026, the guardian filed a motion to change the visitation agreement from the above to supervised visits at 2-hrs each week. The children are not in lock step and have different views.

On 02/13/2026, all parties agreed to suspend visits between bio dad and youngest ward. No changes were proposed for other two wards. Guardian was directed to file additional support for request, and bio dad was directed to file response to the request.

On 03/09/2026, guardian filed two brief statements from non-parties attesting to fact that bio dad is back to using and concerns regarding the wards being in his care on alternate weekends. There do seem to be potential 300/600 issues on the periphery, but the older wards are of the age to have their preferences heavily considered. Related to FL19308.

Refer to court investigator for updated report.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

21 PR12762 In the Matter of Imani Athena Mathiesen 02/25/2026

Kimberley Rose Butt Pro Per

Imani Athena Mathiesen

Appoint Guardian - Person

Temp.

02/25/2026 Petition File Tracking 03/10/2026 High Density

Probate Code §2201: “The proper county for the commencement of a guardianship proceeding for a resident of this state is either (a) the county in which the proposed ward resides [or] (b) such other county as may be in the best interests of the proposed ward.”

California adopted the UCCJEA in early 2000, and it is the exclusive method for determining subject matter jurisdiction in all cases involving the custody of a child – including guardianships. See Family Code §3402(d); Guardianship of Ariana K. (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 690, 701-702. The purposes of the UCCJEA are to avoid jurisdictional competition between states or countries, promote interstate cooperation, avoid relitigation of another state's or country's custody decisions and facilitate enforcement of another state's or country's custody decrees. Pursuant to the UCCJEA, California courts have jurisdiction over custody determinations only if the child's home state is California, or the child's home state does not proceed to adjudicate the dispute. Family Code §3421.

In addition, per Family Code §3041: “Before making an order granting custody to a person other than a parent, over the objection of a parent, the court shall make a finding that granting custody to a parent would be detrimental to the child and that granting custody to the nonparent is required to serve the best interest of the child. Detriment to the child includes the harm of removal from a stable placement of a child with a person who has assumed, on a day-to-day basis, the role of the child's parent. A finding that parental custody would be detrimental to the child shall be supported by clear and convincing evidence.”

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

22 PR12595 Conservatorship of Whitney Eugene Davis 02/05/2025

Randy Mathias Davis Pro Per

Wilma G. Davis Pro Per

Whitney Davis

Review Hearing - Investigator Report - PR Code 1850

02/05/2025 Petition File Tracking 02/21/2025 High Density Other Cases PR12543

Court is awaiting investigative report.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 10:00 am DA Case # Date Filed

23 FL16854 Joseph Lima and Lita Lima 11/18/2020

Joseph Lima Pro Per

Lita Lima Pro Per

Maria Troncoso Pro Per

Motion Hearing

visitation

11/18/2020 Petition File Tracking 01/10/2025 High Density

Mother’s RFO filed 01/06/2026 is moot given the recent establishment of a temporary guardianship.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 1:30 pm DA Case # Date Filed

24 CV67982 Petition of Andrew Brian Cole 01/09/2026

Andrew Brian Cole Pro Per

OSC Hearing - Name Change

01/09/2026 Petition File Tracking 01/23/2026 LP Labels Needed

Nonconfidential proceeding; no proof of publication.

3/10/2026 10:47 am

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Commissioner Steven Streger

Department 5 March 13, 2026 1:30 pm DA Case # Date Filed

25 CV67081 Teresa Houston vs. Ann Taylor 03/18/2025

Teresa Houston Attorney: Hal Channell

Ann Taylor Attorney: Timothy Trujillo

Settlement Conference

03/18/2025 Complaint File Tracking 04/09/2025 High Density

Contract and tenancy dispute.

3/10/2026 10:47 am