DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
FDI-22-796538·sf·FamilyLaw·Contempt
Hearing 4 months agoCONTINUED

Danielle Schmid-Maybach v. Ulrich Schmid-Maybach

Order to Show Cause and Affidavit for Contempt

Hearing date
Apr 28, 2026
Department
403
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

PetitionerDanielle Schmid-Maybach
RespondentUlrich Schmid-Maybach

Ruling

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 4

5) 6 DANIELLE SCHMID-MAYBACH,) Case Number: FDI-22-796538) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: April 28, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 ULRICH SCHMID-MAYBACH,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: BOBBY P. LUNA) 11) 12 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CONTEMPT 13 TENTATIVE RULING 14 Appearances required. The parties may appear in person in Dept. 403 or remotely by Zoom video. 15 If a party chooses to appear by video, that party must abide by the Notice and Instructions for 16 Remote Appearances in San Francisco Family Court set forth above. 17 1) The parties are Petitioner Danielle Schmid-Maybach (Mother) and Respondent Ulrich Schmid- 18 Maybach (Father). 19 2) Dissolution Judgment was entered on 11/10/25 incorporating a Memorandum of Understanding 20 (MOU) signed by the parties on 2/6/25.

See Judgment file dated 11/12/25. 21 3) On for hearing is Mother Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt (file stamped 11/18/25 on the 22 document, but file dated 11/20/25 on the Court’s docket) alleging Father violated the terms of the 23 parties’ 2/6/25 MOU by failing to transfer title of the 2012 Mercedes to Mother. 24 4) On 1/2/26, Mother filed a Proof of Unsuccessful Service indicating the Sheriff’s office made three 25 attempts to serve Mother’s Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt on Father, but Father was not found. 26 5) On 1/21/26, Mother filed a Proof of Personal Service indicating her Order to Show Cause Re: 27 Contempt was served on Father by personal service on 12/10/25. 28 6) On 1/30/26, Mother refiled a Proof of Personal Service indicating her Order to Show Cause Re: 29 Contempt was served on Father by personal service on 12/10/25.

1 7) On 2/5/26, both parties appeared at hearing and Father agreed to a date of service of 2/5/26. As such, 2 the matter was continued to 4/28/26. 3 8) The parties are ordered to appear at hearing on 4/28/26 as the Court intends to arraign Father and 4 set a future trial date. 5

9

13

17

21

25

29

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share