We are checking for the latest updates in this case. We will email you when the process is complete.

Joseline V Vasquez Vs Jesus Vasquez Sanchez Jr

Case Last Refreshed: 3 weeks ago

Vasquez, Joseline V, filed a(n) Divorce,Separation - Family case represented by Bellotti, Amanda Medlin, against Sanchez, Jesus Vasquez Jr, represented by Anderson, Kristina Michelle, in the jurisdiction of Aiken County, SC, . Aiken County, SC Superior Courts with Snelgrove, Vicki J. presiding.

Case Details for Vasquez, Joseline V v. Sanchez, Jesus Vasquez Jr

Judge

Snelgrove, Vicki J.

Filing Date

June 25, 2024

Category

Common Pleas

Last Refreshed

June 27, 2024

Practice Area

Family

Filing Location

Aiken County, SC

Matter Type

Divorce,Separation

Case Outcome Type

Judgment

Parties for Vasquez, Joseline V v. Sanchez, Jesus Vasquez Jr

Plaintiffs

Vasquez, Joseline V

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Bellotti, Amanda Medlin

Defendants

Sanchez, Jesus Vasquez Jr

Attorneys for Defendants

Anderson, Kristina Michelle

Case Events for Vasquez, Joseline V v. Sanchez, Jesus Vasquez Jr

Type Description
Docket Event Certified Copy Divorce Original Filed to 24-DR-02-294
Docket Event Judgment/Divorce
See all events

Related Content in Aiken County

Case

Helen Hankerson VS Andra Simmons
Jul 16, 2024 | Rushton, Patricia Yvonne Arthur | Common Pleas | Magistrate Judg 720 | 2024CP0201730

Case

Navy Federal Credit Union VS Shante T Bouknight
Jul 11, 2024 | Clerk Of Court C P, G S, And Family Court | Common Pleas | Debt Collection 110 | 2024CP0201718

Case

Cwm Investments Llc VS George Edwin Waters , defendant, et al
Jul 11, 2024 | Clerk Of Court C P, G S, And Family Court | Common Pleas | Real Prop/Other 499 | 2024CP0201716

Case

Danko Concrete Construction Llc VS Shaw Industries Group Inc , defendant, et al
Jul 16, 2024 | Clerk Of Court C P, G S, And Family Court | Common Pleas | Foreclosure 420 | 2024CP0201733

Case

Cks Prime Investments Llc VS Guy E Thompson Sr
Jul 11, 2024 | Clerk Of Court C P, G S, And Family Court | Common Pleas | Debt Collection 110 | 2024CP0201705

Case

Troy Capital Llc VS Tyler Hayes
Jul 10, 2024 | Carroll, Tracey Lynn | Common Pleas | Transcript Judg 740 | 2024CP0201701

Case

Catawba Regional Development Corporation VS Coker Spring Capital Group Llc , defendant, et al
Jul 12, 2024 | Clerk Of Court C P, G S, And Family Court | Common Pleas | Foreclosure 420 | 2024CP0201726

Case

Asset Recovery Inc , plaintiff, et al VS K Warren Fulghum , defendant, et al
Jul 17, 2024 | Clerk Of Court C P, G S, And Family Court | Common Pleas | Special-Comp/Oth 699 | 2024CP0201741

Case

Kenneth A Phillips VS Carl J Podgwaite , defendant, et al
Jul 17, 2024 | Clerk Of Court C P, G S, And Family Court | Common Pleas | Motor Veh Accid 320 | 2024CP0201742

Ruling

IN THE MATTER OF: CAMI EKSTROM
Jul 15, 2024 | 24STCP01487
Case Number: 24STCP01487 Hearing Date: July 15, 2024 Dept: 9 Petitioner must double check the spelling and legibility of the new name on the proposed decree. If Petitioner is satisfied with the spelling and legibility of the new name on the proposed decree, NO APPEARANCE IS NECESSARY. If the new name is not clearly written and correctly spelled on the proposed decree, Petitioner must appear at the hearing to submit a corrected proposed decree. The petition is granted. A copy of the signed decree will be available in Room 112 of the Clerk's Office seven days after the date of the hearing. Once the proposed decree is signed, it cannot be amended without a new petition to change name.

Ruling

IN THE MATTER OF: ALBERT L BURNS
Jul 15, 2024 | 24STCP01511
Case Number: 24STCP01511 Hearing Date: July 15, 2024 Dept: 9 The criminal history assessment that the Courts Clerks Office has run through CLETS reveals that Petitioner has an active outstanding warrant. NIC-W243852751 WANTED-NCIC #W243852751 Petitioner must clear the outstanding warrant and file evidence of such before the Court will rule on the petition for name change. The OSC and hearing on the petition for name change are continued to September 9, 2024 at 9:30 am. No later than two weeks before the continued OSC and hearing, Petitioner must file written proof that the outstanding bench warrant has been fully addressed and resolved. Failure to do so will result in the OSC and hearing on the petition being taken off calendar without prejudice to be placed back on calendar upon filing of proof that all outstanding warrants have been cleared. The Court Clerk is to run a new criminal history assessment prior to the continued OSC to verify that the warrant has been cleared. The Court Clerk is to give notice to all parties.

Ruling

2024CUPT025209 IN THE MATTER OF: CARMEN LOPEZ
Jul 19, 2024 | Jeffrey G. Bennett | OSC - Name Change | 2024CUPT025209
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Tentative Ruling 2024CUPT025209: IN THE MATTER OF: CARMEN LOPEZ 07/19/2024 in Department 21 OSC - Name Change The morning calendar in courtroom 21 will normally begin between 8:30 and 8:45 a.m. Please arrive at the courtroom no later than 8:30 a.m. The door will be opened before the calendar is called. The Court allows appearances by CourtCall but is not equipped for Zoom. If appearing by CourtCall, call in no later than 8:15 a.m. If you intend to appear by CourtCall, you must make arrangements with CourtCall by 4:00 p.m. the day before your scheduled hearing. Requests for approval of a CourtCall appearance made on the morning of the hearing will not be granted. No exceptions will be made. With respect to the tentative ruling below, no notice of intent to appear is required. If you wish to submit on the tentative ruling you can fax notice to Judge Riley's secretary, Ms. Sedillos at 805-289-8705, stating that you submit on the tentative. You may also email the Court at: Courtroom21@ventura.courts.ca.gov with all counsel copied on the email. Do not call in lieu of sending a fax or email. If you submit on the tentative without appearing and the opposing party appears, the hearing will be conducted in your absence. If you are the moving party and do not communicate to the Court that you submit on the tentative or you do not appear at the hearing, the Court may deny your motion irrespective of the tentative. Unless stated otherwise at the hearing, if a formal order is not signed at the hearing, the prevailing party shall prepare a proposed order and comply with CRC 3.1312 subdivisions (a), (b), (d) and (e). The signed order shall be served on all parties and a proof of service filed with the court. A "notice of ruling" in lieu of this procedure is not authorized. Tentative Ruling The Court GRANTS the petition for name change. Analysis The Petition appears to be properly filled out and is otherwise sufficient. On July 5, 2024, Petitioner filed proof of publication of the Court’s Order to Show Cause in the TRI-COUNTY SENTRY for four consecutive weeks, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 1277, subd. (a) and the Court’s May 28, 2024, Order to Show Cause. No objections have been filed. The Court has reviewed the CLETS information and found that it is not disqualifying.

Ruling

KENDRA TRUSSELL vs. ANDREW BATE
Jul 19, 2024 | 24FC08645
No appearances necessary. The Petition for Dissolution was filed January 12, 2024. A Proof of Service (FL-115) is filed. More than 30 days have passed since service and no Response is filed. Petitioner must file the form FL-165 and request entry of default and proceed to default judgment. Petitioner is referred to the court’s Family Law Facilitator for assistance in proceeding with default. The FLF is available via email at selfhelp@amadorcourt.org. Further case management is scheduled for November 5, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 3. A Family Law CMC Statement must be filed and served at least 15 days prior to the CMC. (https://www.amadorcourt.org/localForms/familyLaw/FamilyLaw_CMC-STATEMENT.pdf

Ruling

WHITTAKER VS GRAY
Jul 20, 2024 | FL-19-002701
FL-19-002701 – WHITTAKER VS GRAY Petitioner’s Request for Order re Enforce Judgment, etc.—HEARING REQUIRED. The Court finds that proof of service is on file and reflects valid and timely individual mail service of Respondent as required.  (Fam. Code, § 215(a).)  Respondent did not file a Responsive Declaration or written opposition.  Consequently, the Court is inclined to grant the requested relief.  However, a final judgment is already an “order” that the parties are bound to comply with and a further order to comply by the Court would be redundant.  That said, Petitioner’s claims all relate to that part of the judgment dealing with division of pension plans and this has not been accomplished due to Respondent’s non-cooperation.  Accordingly, the Court will not further delay proceedings by again ordering Respondent’s cooperation and, instead, finds good cause to appoint the clerk of the Court as elisor to sign the QDRO and other necessary papers on Respondent’s behalf.  But Petitioner must first submit a proposed order with the exact documents to be signed attached to it for review and approval by the Court.  (Local Rules, rule 7.08(A).)  Petitioner is free to use all the means to obtain information provided by the Civil Discovery Act if documents or other information has not been provided by Respondent.  (Fam. Code, § 218.)  And the Court will reserve jurisdiction over the issue of monetary sanctions against Respondent for the necessity of Petitioner having to file post-judgment motions to obtain Respondent’s compliance.

Ruling

IN THE MATTER OF: JESSICA DIX
Jul 15, 2024 | 24STCP01525
Case Number: 24STCP01525 Hearing Date: July 15, 2024 Dept: 9 Petitioner must double check the spelling and legibility of the new name on the proposed decree. If Petitioner is satisfied with the spelling and legibility of the new name on the proposed decree, NO APPEARANCE IS NECESSARY. If the new name is not clearly written and correctly spelled on the proposed decree, Petitioner must appear at the hearing to submit a corrected proposed decree. The petition is granted. A copy of the signed decree will be available in Room 112 of the Clerk's Office seven days after the date of the hearing. Once the proposed decree is signed, it cannot be amended without a new petition to change name.

Ruling

In Re: Bassett
Jul 18, 2024 | 24CV-0204432
IN RE: BASSETT Case Number: 24CV-0204432 Tentative Ruling on Petition for Change of Name: Petitioner Brittany R. Basset seeks to change the name of her minor son. No proof of publication has been submitted. The Court requires a Certificate of Publication from the publishing newspaper before the Petition may be granted. Additionally, the father of the minor has objected to the proposed name change. An appearance by Petitioner and the father are necessary on today’s calendar.

Ruling

JACKSON VS JACKSON
Jul 21, 2024 | FL-23-002067
FL-23-002067 – JACKSON VS JACKSON Petitioner’s Request for Order re “Sell Family Residence,” etc.—HEARING REQUIRED. This is a continued hearing.  It appears that the request regarding the 1972 Chevrolet Pickup Truck has been resolved or is moot.  Likewise, this appears to be the case with the request regarding the marital residence because Respondent is not opposed to sale provided that sufficient time before listing and sale is extended in order to conduct repairs necessary to obtain full value and as short a time on market as possible.  (Respondent’s Supplemental Declaration.)  The Court will reserve jurisdiction over the question of attorney’s fees and costs until disposition of the marital residence.  Counsel are to meet and confer prior to the hearing as to a reasonable time for repairs to be completed and any other disputes that are within the scope of the pending order request.  (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.98.) The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge J. Richard Distaso in Department #13: THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES. The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Sweena Pannu in Department #14: THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES. The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge David I. Hood in Department #25:

Document

MIRANDA WOLF VS KYLE WHITE
Jun 20, 2014 | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | 14CVD008178-910

Document

MECKLENBURG CO OBO VS ANDREW D CLARK
Mar 27, 2013 | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | 13CVD005927-590

Document

DASHAN BANKS VS ALTHEA ALSTON
Mar 04, 2020 | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | 20CVD003351-910

Document

WAKE CO OBO VS JUSTIN D VERNON
Apr 07, 2021 | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | 21CVD004860-910

Document

Christina Calderon VS Daniel Calderon
Sep 19, 2023 | Civil Domestic with Absolute Divorce | Civil Domestic with Absolute Divorce | 23CV005143-500

Document

Danielle Brown VS Max Taylor Brown
Aug 23, 2022 | Civil Domestic with Absolute Divorce | Civil Domestic with Absolute Divorce | 22CVD000761-520

Document

WAKE CO OBO VS SAMUEL M HORNE
Feb 02, 2017 | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | Civil Domestic without Claim for absolute divorce | 17CVD000884-910

Document

Michelle Dircksen v. Richard Dircksen
Jul 11, 2024 | Cindy R. Volkmer | Dissolution of Marriage | D 15 CI 24 0000345