Judge: Curtis A. Kin, Case: 23STCP00041, Date: 2024-10-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCP00041    Hearing Date: October 1, 2024    Dept: 86

MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

Date:               9/26/24 (1:30 PM)

Case:               Mr. Earnest A. Davis v. Los Angeles County Child Support Services

(23STCP00041)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Petitioner Earnest A. Davis’s UNOPPOSED Motion to Augment Record is GRANTED CONDITIONALLY.

Petitioner seeks to augment the administrative record, asserting that a photograph revealing the race of his custodial daughter is missing from the administrative record. (Mtn. at 2:1-28; Davis Decl. ¶¶ 21, 25, 31, 34, 36, 43, 45, 46.) Petitioner, however, did not file any proof of service pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1013a indicating that he served the motion on respondent Los Angeles County Child Support Services Department.  As service is required by Code of Civil Procedure § 1005(b), the motion could be denied on that basis.

However, three court days before the hearing, respondent filed a “Non-Opposition and Response to Petitioner’s Motion to Augment the Record.”  The filing of this non-opposition, albeit extremely untimely, would suggest that respondent was served the motion or, at the very least, received some form of notice of it.  Insofar as respondent received timely notice of the motion and hearing, the Court admonishes respondent for the untimely filing and notes that the Court may disregard its untimely filings in the future. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1300(d) [“[I]f the court, in its discretion, refuses to consider a late filed paper, the minutes or order must so indicate”].)  Under the circumstances, however, the Court exercises its discretion to consider respondent’s untimely filing. 

Respondent does not oppose petitioner’s request to augment the record insofar as petitioner seeks to include a photograph of petitioner’s daughter purportedly submitted by petitioner to the State, Kern County, or Los Angeles County and referenced during the administrative hearing.  As pointed out by respondent, however, petitioner fails to include with his motion the material(s) with which he hopes to augment the record.

In light of the foregoing, the Court CONDITIONALLY GRANTS petitioner’s motion, subject to his filing and serving a proposed order permitting him to augment the record with the material(s) attached to the proposed order.  If there is a valid proof of service of the proposed order upon respondent and no objection to the order received from respondent within ten (10) days of service, the Court will sign the proposed order.