Rinche

Rinche v. Necib CA1/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 26, 2026A174028California946 words

Opinion

Opinion

Petrou, J.

Background In early 2025, Rinche filed a request for a CHRO against Necib. The court denied this request on March 12, 2025. Rinche sought reconsideration of the order, which was subsequently denied by the court on May 19, 2025. Rinche filed another request for a CHRO in late May, 2025. Necib then filed a cross-petition for a restraining order against Rinche. The court granted Necib’s temporary restraining order (TRO) against Rinche as to Necib and his daughter, but denied the request as to Rinche’s contact with government agencies. The court also denied Rinche’s request for a TRO. On June 10, 2025, the court again denied Rinche’s request for a CHRO and granted Necib a six-month CHRO “with the same terms of the temporary order.” The court denied Rinche’s request to stay enforcement of the CHRO pending this appeal. Rinche subsequently appealed. This court requested the parties provide supplemental briefing on the question of mootness because the CHRO expired on December 10, 2025—five days prior to Rinche filing his opening appellate brief. In response, Rinche filed a supplemental brief alleging the appeal is not moot. Specifically, Rinche asserted (1) meaningful relief is available…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.