letter-minors-counsel-parenting-plan-proposal.docx

1035-00002 · Calderwood & Harkness LLP · Third-Party Correspondence

letter-minors-counsel-parenting-plan-proposal.docx DOCUMENT M&A / Corporate

35 / 36 ← → ✕

CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP Attorneys at Law 777 South Flower Street, Suite 3400 Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 555-7200 Facsimile: (213) 555-7201

November 8, 2023

Tessa L. Brannigan, Esq. California State Bar No. 267894 6320 Canoga Avenue, Suite 1500 Woodland Hills, California 91367

Re: In re Fonseca / Medrano — Case No. 22STFL09847, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles

Minor Children: Isabela Luz Fonseca-Medrano (DOB: February 11, 2017) and Mateo Elías Fonseca-Medrano (DOB: August 29, 2019)

C&H Matter No.: 1035-00002

Via Email and U.S. Mail

Dear Ms. Brannigan:

I. Purpose and Background

I write on behalf of our client, Marguerite D. Fonseca ("Ms. Fonseca" or "Petitioner"), in connection with the above-referenced custody and parenting-plan dispute with Rafael J. Medrano ("Mr. Medrano" or "Respondent"). As you are aware, Calderwood & Harkness LLP represents Ms. Fonseca in all aspects of the pending proceedings before the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.

You were appointed as Minor's Counsel on June 22, 2023, pursuant to California Family Code Section 3150, to represent the interests of the parties' two minor children, Isabela Luz Fonseca-Medrano and Mateo Elías Fonseca-Medrano. We appreciate the seriousness with which you have undertaken that role and the attention you have devoted to the children's welfare throughout this matter. Mr. Medrano continues to be represented in this proceeding by Gwendolyn R. Kwan, Esq. (California State Bar No. 218453) and Benjamin T. Okafor, Esq. (California State Bar No. 312776) of the firm Kwan, Delacroix & Samuels LLP, located at 4400 Riverside Drive, Suite 700, Burbank, California 91505.

The purpose of this letter is twofold. First, we wish to transmit Ms. Fonseca's proposed parenting plan for your review and input. Second, we respectfully request your written position on the proposals—or any alternative recommendations you believe serve the children's best interests—in advance of the first scheduled mediation session before the Honorable Constance M. Yee (Ret.) of Pacific Coast Dispute Resolution Services, which is set for November 17, 2023. Enclosed with this letter you will find a draft Proposed Stipulated Custody & Parenting Plan Agreement, together with draft Exhibit A (Holiday & Vacation Schedule) and draft Exhibit B (Right of First Refusal & Travel Notice Protocol). We believe these materials provide a thorough and workable framework for resolution, and we look forward to the benefit of your perspective before we proceed to mediation.

II. Procedural History Summary

To ensure a complete record for your files, we provide the following summary of the procedural history of this matter:

Ms. Fonseca and Mr. Medrano registered their domestic partnership on September 12, 2015, with the California Secretary of State (File No. DP-2015-038741). Following the breakdown of the parties' relationship, Ms. Fonseca filed a Petition for Dissolution of Domestic Partnership on July 8, 2022, which was assigned Case No. 22STFL09847 in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. A Judgment of Dissolution was entered on November 3, 2022. Notably, the court reserved jurisdiction over all issues relating to custody, visitation, and child support, as the parties had been unable to reach agreement on those matters at the time of dissolution.

On May 2, 2023, Ms. Fonseca filed a Request for Order seeking primary physical custody of the minor children and an order for child support. Following briefing and a hearing, the court entered a Temporary Custody Order on May 30, 2023, establishing a 60/40 timeshare in favor of Ms. Fonseca during the pendency of the custody proceedings. That temporary order has remained in effect and has been the operative framework governing the children's custodial schedule since its entry.

Pursuant to the court's direction, you were appointed as Minor's Counsel on June 22, 2023, to independently represent the interests of Isabela and Mateo in these proceedings. Shortly thereafter, on July 14, 2023, the parties filed a Stipulation and Order for the Appointment of a Custody Evaluator, pursuant to which Dr. Elena V. Sorensen, Psy.D. (California License No. PSY 24891), of Sorensen Family Behavioral Health, P.C., was appointed to conduct a comprehensive custody evaluation under Evidence Code Section 730. Additionally, on the same date, the court entered a Stipulation and Order to Seal the Court File pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 2.550 et seq., in light of the public-facing nature of both parents' careers in the entertainment industry and the attendant privacy concerns for the minor children.

Dr. Sorensen completed her custody evaluation and delivered her written report to all counsel of record on October 6, 2023. We address the substance of that report briefly in Section V below.

Finally, the parties have agreed—and the court has so ordered—that the first mediation session before the Honorable Constance M. Yee (Ret.) of Pacific Coast Dispute Resolution Services shall take place on November 17, 2023. It is our hope that the enclosed proposed parenting plan, informed by the custody evaluation and the parties' experience under the temporary order, will serve as a constructive starting point for those discussions.

III. The Minor Children

We provide the following background regarding the two minor children for the sake of completeness and to contextualize certain provisions of the proposed parenting plan:

Isabela Luz Fonseca-Medrano. Isabela is six years old, born on February 11, 2017. She is currently enrolled in first grade at Ridgeview Academy, a private school located at 4515 Sepulveda Boulevard, Sherman Oaks, California 91403. Annual tuition for the first-grade program at Ridgeview Academy is $32,400. Isabela has attended Ridgeview since she entered the pre-kindergarten program and is thriving academically and socially in the school community.

Mateo Elías Fonseca-Medrano. Mateo is four years old, born on August 29, 2019. He is currently enrolled in the pre-kindergarten program at Ridgeview Academy. Annual tuition for the pre-kindergarten program is $26,800. Mateo began at Ridgeview in the fall of 2022 and has adjusted well to the program.

Since the entry of the May 30, 2023 Temporary Custody Order, both children have been residing primarily with Ms. Fonseca at her residence located at 1742 Laurel Canyon Boulevard, Unit 3A, Studio City, California 91604. Mr. Medrano resides at 609 Moorpark Street, Apartment 12, North Hollywood, California 91602, which is approximately four miles from Ms. Fonseca's residence and approximately six miles from Ridgeview Academy.

We note for context that the informal custody arrangement that had been in place following the November 2022 dissolution judgment broke down in early 2023 when Mr. Medrano accepted a seven-week on-location shoot in Vancouver, British Columbia, during which he was largely unavailable to exercise custodial time. It was that disruption—and the resulting lack of predictability for the children—that prompted Ms. Fonseca's May 2023 filing. We do not raise this to assign blame, but rather to illustrate the practical need for a parenting plan that accounts for the realities of both parents' professional obligations, particularly Mr. Medrano's periodic extended travel for on-location work. The proposed plan's travel and make-up provisions, discussed in Section IV.4 below, are specifically designed to address this concern.

IV. Summary of Proposed Parenting Plan Terms

The enclosed draft Proposed Stipulated Custody & Parenting Plan Agreement sets forth the following principal terms. We summarize them here for ease of reference and to invite your focused input on each component.

A. Legal Custody

Ms. Fonseca proposes that the parties share joint legal custody of both Isabela and Mateo. Both parents would be required to consult in good faith on all major decisions affecting the children's health, education, welfare, and participation in extracurricular activities. Consistent with the reality that Ms. Fonseca has been the parent primarily responsible for managing the children's enrollment, academic progress, and day-to-day educational needs at Ridgeview Academy—and in recognition of her established role as the primary caretaker during the formative early years of both children's lives—Ms. Fonseca proposes that she hold tie-breaking authority on educational decisions in the event that the parties are unable to reach agreement after good-faith consultation. This tie-breaking mechanism is narrowly limited to educational matters and is not intended to diminish Mr. Medrano's voice or participation in any other sphere of decision-making. The proposal is designed to avoid paralysis on time-sensitive educational decisions while preserving the cooperative framework of joint legal custody.

B. Physical Custody and Timeshare

Ms. Fonseca proposes that the parties share joint physical custody, with the children's primary residence designated with Ms. Fonseca. Under the proposed schedule, the school-year timeshare would be approximately 65% with Ms. Fonseca and 35% with Mr. Medrano. Calculated on an annualized basis, this translates to approximately 232 overnights per year with Ms. Fonseca and approximately 133 overnights per year with Mr. Medrano (232 ÷ 365 ≈ 63.6%; 133 ÷ 365 ≈ 36.4%).

During the summer break, which encompasses a ten-week period (approximately 70 days), custodial time would be split equally—50/50—with each parent receiving 35 overnights. This summer arrangement affords Mr. Medrano a meaningful block of uninterrupted time with the children and recognizes that his work schedule may be more flexible during the summer months when certain production cycles are in hiatus.

This proposed timeshare reflects the pattern that has been established and functioning effectively under the May 30, 2023 Temporary Custody Order. It is also consistent with the recommendations set forth in Dr. Sorensen's custody evaluation report, which we discuss further in Section V below. The children have adjusted well to the current arrangement, and Ms. Fonseca believes that stability and continuity weigh strongly in favor of maintaining a schedule that closely mirrors what the children have known since mid-2023.

C. Holiday and Vacation Schedule (Exhibit A)

The enclosed draft Exhibit A sets forth a detailed holiday and vacation schedule. The proposal follows a standard alternating annual framework (even-year/odd-year rotation) for the major holidays, including Thanksgiving, the winter break period (encompassing both Christmas and New Year's), and spring break. Each parent would also be allocated specific designated holidays based on family tradition and personal significance.

Exhibit A includes provisions for specific pick-up and drop-off times and locations, which we anticipate will be further refined through the mediation process in collaboration with your office and opposing counsel. The goal is to minimize transitions during the school week and to ensure that exchanges occur at predictable, convenient locations for all parties. We welcome your input on any adjustments to the holiday rotation or transition logistics that you believe would better serve the children's interests.

D. Right of First Refusal and Travel Notice Protocol (Exhibit B)

Draft Exhibit B addresses two related but distinct matters: the right of first refusal for childcare and a comprehensive travel notice protocol.

Right of First Refusal. The proposed plan provides that when either parent will be unavailable to care for the children during his or her custodial time for a period exceeding eight consecutive hours, the other parent shall have the right of first refusal to provide care for the children during that period. This provision is intended to maximize each parent's time with the children and to reduce the children's reliance on third-party childcare when a parent is available and willing to provide care.

Travel Notice Requirements. The proposed plan establishes a tiered notice framework for travel with the children. For any travel outside the continental United States, the traveling parent must provide thirty (30) days' written notice to the other parent and must obtain the other parent's written consent or, in the absence of consent, a court order authorizing the travel. For domestic travel outside the State of California, the traveling parent must provide fourteen (14) days' written notice to the other parent.

On-Location Work Provision. Of particular importance to this family's circumstances is the proposed on-location work provision. If either parent accepts professional work requiring travel of more than fourteen (14) consecutive calendar days, custodial time for those days shall transfer to the other parent, with make-up time to be scheduled within sixty (60) days of the traveling parent's return. This provision is designed to address the realities of Mr. Medrano's profession as a freelance cinematographer and director of photography, which periodically requires extended on-location work away from the Los Angeles area. The breakdown of the informal custody arrangement in early 2023—precipitated by Mr. Medrano's seven-week shoot in Vancouver—underscores the need for a clear, enforceable protocol. We emphasize, however, that this provision is drafted reciprocally and applies with equal force to Ms. Fonseca, whose role as Senior Vice President of Original Content Development at Luminos Entertainment Group, Inc. may also require periodic travel, although her travel obligations have historically been of shorter duration and less frequent.

E. Child Support

Ms. Fonseca's proposed child support terms are based on the following income figures, which have been established through discovery and forensic analysis in this proceeding:

Ms. Fonseca's Gross Monthly Income: $72,500. Ms. Fonseca's total annual compensation from Luminos Entertainment Group, Inc. is approximately $870,000, comprised of (i) a base salary of $485,000, (ii) an average annual performance bonus of approximately $210,000 (based on a three-year trailing average), and (iii) annual restricted stock unit ("RSU") vesting of approximately $175,000.

Mr. Medrano's Imputed Gross Monthly Income: $28,333. Based on the forensic accounting analysis conducted by Harold K. Yamamoto, CPA/ABV/CFF, of Yamamoto Brace & Liu, LLP, Mr. Medrano's three-year average annual income through his wholly-owned production services entity, Medrano Visuals, LLC, is approximately $340,000. Given the variable nature of Mr. Medrano's freelance income—which has ranged from approximately $215,000 in lower-earning years to approximately $480,000 in peak years—Mr. Yamamoto's analysis imputes income based on the three-year trailing average as the most reliable measure of Mr. Medrano's earning capacity.

Combined Gross Monthly Income: $100,833.

Based on a DissoMaster calculation using the foregoing income figures, a two-child household, and the proposed 63.6% / 36.4% timeshare, the California guideline child support obligation is $1,274 per month, payable by Ms. Fonseca to Mr. Medrano.

Ms. Fonseca proposes an agreed deviation from guideline to $1,100 per month—a reduction of $174 per month below the guideline figure. This deviation is justified under California Family Code Section 4057(b) by the fact that Mr. Medrano would, under the proposed plan, assume a disproportionately higher share of the children's extracurricular activity costs (as set forth in Section IV.F below). When the additional extracurricular cost burden on Mr. Medrano is taken into account, the overall financial arrangement remains consistent with the children's needs and the statutory objectives of the child support guidelines. The proposed stipulated amount remains well above any floor that would be inconsistent with the children's best interests.

F. Education and Extracurricular Costs

Tuition at Ridgeview Academy. Ms. Fonseca proposes that tuition costs at Ridgeview Academy be allocated 70% to Ms. Fonseca and 30% to Mr. Medrano, as follows:

This allocation reflects the proportional disparity in the parties' incomes while ensuring that both parents contribute meaningfully to the children's educational expenses.

Extracurricular and Enrichment Activities. Costs for extracurricular and enrichment activities for each child—including but not limited to organized sports, music lessons, art classes, tutoring, and summer enrichment camps—would be split 60% Mr. Medrano and 40% Ms. Fonseca for activities costing up to $1,500 per child per quarter. Any single activity or combination of activities the cost of which would exceed the $1,500 per child per quarter cap would require the mutual written consent of both parents before enrollment.

The higher extracurricular cost share borne by Mr. Medrano is the express quid pro quo for the $174 per month downward deviation in base child support. When the extracurricular cost-sharing arrangement is viewed in conjunction with the guideline deviation, the overall financial framework is equitable and ensures that neither parent bears a disproportionate share of the children's total expenses relative to income.

G. Healthcare. The proposed plan provides that the children shall remain enrolled on Ms. Fonseca's employer-sponsored health insurance plan, which is administered by Veridian Health Insurance Co. through Luminos Entertainment Group, Inc. Ms. Fonseca's plan provides comprehensive medical, dental, and vision coverage for dependent children, and the children have been continuously enrolled on this plan since birth.

Unreimbursed medical, dental, orthodontic, and mental health expenses—including co-pays, deductibles, and any costs not covered by the Veridian plan—would be allocated 70% to Ms. Fonseca and 30% to Mr. Medrano, consistent with the overall income-proportional framework used for tuition allocation.

H. Annual Review

Child support under the proposed agreement would be subject to review on the anniversary of the entry of the order, or earlier upon a material change in circumstances. For purposes of this provision, a "material change in circumstances" is defined as (i) a change in either parent's gross income exceeding fifteen percent (15%), or (ii) a change in the custodial timeshare exceeding ten percent (10%). This definition is intended to provide clarity and predictability, reduce litigation over the threshold for modification, and ensure that the support order remains responsive to changes in the parties' financial circumstances and the children's living arrangements.

I. Parenting Plan Coordinator

Ms. Fonseca proposes that the parties jointly appoint a Parenting Plan Coordinator to assist in resolving day-to-day scheduling disputes and implementation issues without the need to return to court. We propose Dr. Marcus W. Ingalls, LMFT (California License No. LMFT 89412), of Ingalls & Cuevas Family Counseling, located at 10880 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 630, Los Angeles, California 90024, for this role. Dr. Ingalls has extensive experience serving as a parenting plan coordinator in high-conflict and complex family law matters in the Los Angeles area, and his office is conveniently located for both parties. The appointment of a coordinator would provide a structured, efficient, and cost-effective mechanism for addressing the inevitable logistical questions and minor scheduling adjustments that arise in any shared custody arrangement, and would be particularly valuable here given the demands of both parents' professional lives in the entertainment industry.

We welcome your input on this proposal, including any alternative candidates you believe would be well-suited to the role.

J. Confidentiality and Non-Disparagement

Finally, the proposed agreement includes mutual non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions. Neither party would disparage the other in the presence of the children or in any public forum. Additionally, neither party would disclose the financial terms of the agreement or the contents of the custody evaluation to any third party, except to their respective legal counsel, tax advisors, or as required by court order.

These provisions are consistent with the Stipulation and Order to Seal the Court File entered on July 14, 2023, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 2.550 et seq. Given both parents' public-facing roles in the entertainment industry—and the particular vulnerability of the children to unwanted public attention—Ms. Fonseca considers these protections to be of significant importance and a core component of any settlement agreement.

V. Reference to the Custody Evaluation

As noted above, Dr. Sorensen's custody evaluation report was delivered to all counsel of record on October 6, 2023. We have reviewed the report in detail. Without disclosing the specific contents of the evaluation in this correspondence—consistent with the confidentiality protections surrounding the report—we note that the principal terms of the proposed parenting plan are consistent with and supported by the evaluator's findings and recommendations. Dr. Sorensen's assessment of the children's adjustment under the current custodial arrangement, the quality of each parent's relationship with the children, and the developmental needs of each child informed our drafting of the proposed terms in meaningful ways.

We would welcome the opportunity to discuss the report's conclusions with you at your convenience, subject to the applicable confidentiality protections. If you believe a joint conference call with all counsel to review the evaluation findings would be productive in advance of the mediation session, we are amenable to that approach as well.

VI. Request for Your Input

We respectfully request that you review the enclosed proposed parenting plan and the accompanying Exhibits A and B at your earliest convenience. We would be grateful for your written position on the proposals, including any specific modifications, alternative recommendations, or additional provisions that you believe would better serve the best interests of Isabela and Mateo, in advance of the November 17, 2023 mediation session before the Honorable Constance M. Yee (Ret.).

Ms. Fonseca's primary objective throughout these proceedings has been—and remains—to reach a comprehensive settlement through mediation that promotes stability, continuity, and emotional well-being for both children. She is committed to a collaborative process and is prepared to consider reasonable modifications to any of the terms outlined herein in the interest of achieving a resolution that all parties, including Minor's Counsel, can support.

We also wish to extend an invitation for you to participate in the mediation sessions if you believe that your presence would be beneficial to the process and to the children's interests. Please be advised that both the mediator, the Honorable Constance M. Yee (Ret.), and opposing counsel at Kwan, Delacroix & Samuels LLP have been notified of the substance and transmittal of this letter.

VII. Availability and Contact

I am available to meet in person or to confer by telephone at your earliest convenience to discuss any aspect of the proposed parenting plan or the upcoming mediation. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly at the following:

Devon Archer Calderwood & Harkness LLP 777 South Flower Street, Suite 3400 Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 555-7200 Direct Dial: (213) 555-7218

Email: d.archer@calderwoodharkness.com

For any matters requiring partner-level discussion, please feel free to contact Priya Anand, Esq., who serves as the billing partner on this engagement and is fully apprised of all aspects of the matter. Ms. Anand can be reached at (213) 555-7205 or p.anand@calderwoodharkness.com.

Thank you for your attention to this matter and for your continued dedication to Isabela's and Mateo's well-being. We look forward to hearing from you.

Very truly yours,

CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP

By: ________

Devon Archer Associate

Enclosures:

1. Draft Proposed Stipulated Custody & Parenting Plan Agreement

2. Draft Exhibit A — Holiday & Vacation Schedule

3. Draft Exhibit B — Right of First Refusal & Travel Notice Protocol

cc: Marguerite D. Fonseca (client) (via email) cc: Priya Anand, Esq., Calderwood & Harkness LLP (via email)

Note: This letter and its enclosures are directed solely to Minor's Counsel in her capacity under California Family Code Section 3150 and have not been transmitted to opposing counsel.

Child	Annual Tuition	Ms. Fonseca (70%)	Mr. Medrano (30%)
Isabela	$32,400	$22,680	$9,720
Mateo	$26,800	$18,760	$8,040
Total	$59,200	$41,440	$17,760

CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP Attorneys at Law 777 South Flower Street, Suite 3400 Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 555-7200 Facsimile: (213) 555-7201
November 8, 2023
Tessa L. Brannigan, Esq. California State Bar No. 267894 6320 Canoga Avenue, Suite 1500 Woodland Hills, California 91367
Re: In re Fonseca / Medrano — Case No. 22STFL09847, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles
Minor Children: Isabela Luz Fonseca-Medrano (DOB: February 11, 2017) and Mateo Elías Fonseca-Medrano (DOB: August 29, 2019)
C&H Matter No.: 1035-00002
Via Email and U.S. Mail
Dear Ms. Brannigan:
I. Purpose and Background
I write on behalf of our client, Marguerite D. Fonseca ("Ms. Fonseca" or "Petitioner"), in connection with the above-referenced custody and parenting-plan dispute with Rafael J. Medrano ("Mr. Medrano" or "Respondent"). As you are aware, Calderwood & Harkness LLP represents Ms. Fonseca in all aspects of the pending proceedings before the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
You were appointed as Minor's Counsel on June 22, 2023, pursuant to California Family Code Section 3150, to represent the interests of the parties' two minor children, Isabela Luz Fonseca-Medrano and Mateo Elías Fonseca-Medrano. We appreciate the seriousness with which you have undertaken that role and the attention you have devoted to the children's welfare throughout this matter. Mr. Medrano continues to be represented in this proceeding by Gwendolyn R. Kwan, Esq. (California State Bar No. 218453) and Benjamin T. Okafor, Esq. (California State Bar No. 312776) of the firm Kwan, Delacroix & Samuels LLP, located at 4400 Riverside Drive, Suite 700, Burbank, California 91505.
The purpose of this letter is twofold. First, we wish to transmit Ms. Fonseca's proposed parenting plan for your review and input. Second, we respectfully request your written position on the proposals—or any alternative recommendations you believe serve the children's best interests—in advance of the first scheduled mediation session before the Honorable Constance M. Yee (Ret.) of Pacific Coast Dispute Resolution Services, which is set for November 17, 2023. Enclosed with this letter you will find a draft Proposed Stipulated Custody & Parenting Plan Agreement, together with draft Exhibit A (Holiday & Vacation Schedule) and draft Exhibit B (Right of First Refusal & Travel Notice Protocol). We believe these materials provide a thorough and workable framework for resolution, and we look forward to the benefit of your perspective before we proceed to mediation.
II. Procedural History Summary
To ensure a complete record for your files, we provide the following summary of the procedural history of this matter:
Ms. Fonseca and Mr. Medrano registered their domestic partnership on September 12, 2015, with the California Secretary of State (File No. DP-2015-038741). Following the breakdown of the parties' relationship, Ms. Fonseca filed a Petition for Dissolution of Domestic Partnership on July 8, 2022, which was assigned Case No. 22STFL09847 in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. A Judgment of Dissolution was entered on November 3, 2022. Notably, the court reserved jurisdiction over all issues relating to custody, visitation, and child support, as the parties had been unable to reach agreement on those matters at the time of dissolution.
On May 2, 2023, Ms. Fonseca filed a Request for Order seeking primary physical custody of the minor children and an order for child support. Following briefing and a hearing, the court entered a Temporary Custody Order on May 30, 2023, establishing a 60/40 timeshare in favor of Ms. Fonseca during the pendency of the custody proceedings. That temporary order has remained in effect and has been the operative framework governing the children's custodial schedule since its entry.
Pursuant to the court's direction, you were appointed as Minor's Counsel on June 22, 2023, to independently represent the interests of Isabela and Mateo in these proceedings. Shortly thereafter, on July 14, 2023, the parties filed a Stipulation and Order for the Appointment of a Custody Evaluator, pursuant to which Dr. Elena V. Sorensen, Psy.D. (California License No. PSY 24891), of Sorensen Family Behavioral Health, P.C., was appointed to conduct a comprehensive custody evaluation under Evidence Code Section 730. Additionally, on the same date, the court entered a Stipulation and Order to Seal the Court File pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 2.550 et seq., in light of the public-facing nature of both parents' careers in the entertainment industry and the attendant privacy concerns for the minor children.
Dr. Sorensen completed her custody evaluation and delivered her written report to all counsel of record on October 6, 2023. We address the substance of that report briefly in Section V below.
Finally, the parties have agreed—and the court has so ordered—that the first mediation session before the Honorable Constance M. Yee (Ret.) of Pacific Coast Dispute Resolution Services shall take place on November 17, 2023. It is our hope that the enclosed proposed parenting plan, informed by the custody evaluation and the parties' experience under the temporary order, will serve as a constructive starting point for those discussions.
III. The Minor Children
We provide the following background regarding the two minor children for the sake of completeness and to contextualize certain provisions of the proposed parenting plan:
Isabela Luz Fonseca-Medrano. Isabela is six years old, born on February 11, 2017. She is currently enrolled in first grade at Ridgeview Academy, a private school located at 4515 Sepulveda Boulevard, Sherman Oaks, California 91403. Annual tuition for the first-grade program at Ridgeview Academy is $32,400. Isabela has attended Ridgeview since she entered the pre-kindergarten program and is thriving academically and socially in the school community.
Mateo Elías Fonseca-Medrano. Mateo is four years old, born on August 29, 2019. He is currently enrolled in the pre-kindergarten program at Ridgeview Academy. Annual tuition for the pre-kindergarten program is $26,800. Mateo began at Ridgeview in the fall of 2022 and has adjusted well to the program.
Since the entry of the May 30, 2023 Temporary Custody Order, both children have been residing primarily with Ms. Fonseca at her residence located at 1742 Laurel Canyon Boulevard, Unit 3A, Studio City, California 91604. Mr. Medrano resides at 609 Moorpark Street, Apartment 12, North Hollywood, California 91602, which is approximately four miles from Ms. Fonseca's residence and approximately six miles from Ridgeview Academy.
We note for context that the informal custody arrangement that had been in place following the November 2022 dissolution judgment broke down in early 2023 when Mr. Medrano accepted a seven-week on-location shoot in Vancouver, British Columbia, during which he was largely unavailable to exercise custodial time. It was that disruption—and the resulting lack of predictability for the children—that prompted Ms. Fonseca's May 2023 filing. We do not raise this to assign blame, but rather to illustrate the practical need for a parenting plan that accounts for the realities of both parents' professional obligations, particularly Mr. Medrano's periodic extended travel for on-location work. The proposed plan's travel and make-up provisions, discussed in Section IV.4 below, are specifically designed to address this concern.
IV. Summary of Proposed Parenting Plan Terms
The enclosed draft Proposed Stipulated Custody & Parenting Plan Agreement sets forth the following principal terms. We summarize them here for ease of reference and to invite your focused input on each component.
A. Legal Custody
Ms. Fonseca proposes that the parties share joint legal custody of both Isabela and Mateo. Both parents would be required to consult in good faith on all major decisions affecting the children's health, education, welfare, and participation in extracurricular activities. Consistent with the reality that Ms. Fonseca has been the parent primarily responsible for managing the children's enrollment, academic progress, and day-to-day educational needs at Ridgeview Academy—and in recognition of her established role as the primary caretaker during the formative early years of both children's lives—Ms. Fonseca proposes that she hold tie-breaking authority on educational decisions in the event that the parties are unable to reach agreement after good-faith consultation. This tie-breaking mechanism is narrowly limited to educational matters and is not intended to diminish Mr. Medrano's voice or participation in any other sphere of decision-making. The proposal is designed to avoid paralysis on time-sensitive educational decisions while preserving the cooperative framework of joint legal custody.
B. Physical Custody and Timeshare
Ms. Fonseca proposes that the parties share joint physical custody, with the children's primary residence designated with Ms. Fonseca. Under the proposed schedule, the school-year timeshare would be approximately 65% with Ms. Fonseca and 35% with Mr. Medrano. Calculated on an annualized basis, this translates to approximately 232 overnights per year with Ms. Fonseca and approximately 133 overnights per year with Mr. Medrano (232 ÷ 365 ≈ 63.6%; 133 ÷ 365 ≈ 36.4%).
During the summer break, which encompasses a ten-week period (approximately 70 days), custodial time would be split equally—50/50—with each parent receiving 35 overnights. This summer arrangement affords Mr. Medrano a meaningful block of uninterrupted time with the children and recognizes that his work schedule may be more flexible during the summer months when certain production cycles are in hiatus.
This proposed timeshare reflects the pattern that has been established and functioning effectively under the May 30, 2023 Temporary Custody Order. It is also consistent with the recommendations set forth in Dr. Sorensen's custody evaluation report, which we discuss further in Section V below. The children have adjusted well to the current arrangement, and Ms. Fonseca believes that stability and continuity weigh strongly in favor of maintaining a schedule that closely mirrors what the children have known since mid-2023.
C. Holiday and Vacation Schedule (Exhibit A)
The enclosed draft Exhibit A sets forth a detailed holiday and vacation schedule. The proposal follows a standard alternating annual framework (even-year/odd-year rotation) for the major holidays, including Thanksgiving, the winter break period (encompassing both Christmas and New Year's), and spring break. Each parent would also be allocated specific designated holidays based on family tradition and personal significance.
Exhibit A includes provisions for specific pick-up and drop-off times and locations, which we anticipate will be further refined through the mediation process in collaboration with your office and opposing counsel. The goal is to minimize transitions during the school week and to ensure that exchanges occur at predictable, convenient locations for all parties. We welcome your input on any adjustments to the holiday rotation or transition logistics that you believe would better serve the children's interests.
D. Right of First Refusal and Travel Notice Protocol (Exhibit B)
Draft Exhibit B addresses two related but distinct matters: the right of first refusal for childcare and a comprehensive travel notice protocol.
Right of First Refusal. The proposed plan provides that when either parent will be unavailable to care for the children during his or her custodial time for a period exceeding eight consecutive hours, the other parent shall have the right of first refusal to provide care for the children during that period. This provision is intended to maximize each parent's time with the children and to reduce the children's reliance on third-party childcare when a parent is available and willing to provide care.
Travel Notice Requirements. The proposed plan establishes a tiered notice framework for travel with the children. For any travel outside the continental United States, the traveling parent must provide thirty (30) days' written notice to the other parent and must obtain the other parent's written consent or, in the absence of consent, a court order authorizing the travel. For domestic travel outside the State of California, the traveling parent must provide fourteen (14) days' written notice to the other parent.
On-Location Work Provision. Of particular importance to this family's circumstances is the proposed on-location work provision. If either parent accepts professional work requiring travel of more than fourteen (14) consecutive calendar days, custodial time for those days shall transfer to the other parent, with make-up time to be scheduled within sixty (60) days of the traveling parent's return. This provision is designed to address the realities of Mr. Medrano's profession as a freelance cinematographer and director of photography, which periodically requires extended on-location work away from the Los Angeles area. The breakdown of the informal custody arrangement in early 2023—precipitated by Mr. Medrano's seven-week shoot in Vancouver—underscores the need for a clear, enforceable protocol. We emphasize, however, that this provision is drafted reciprocally and applies with equal force to Ms. Fonseca, whose role as Senior Vice President of Original Content Development at Luminos Entertainment Group, Inc. may also require periodic travel, although her travel obligations have historically been of shorter duration and less frequent.
E. Child Support
Ms. Fonseca's proposed child support terms are based on the following income figures, which have been established through discovery and forensic analysis in this proceeding:
Ms. Fonseca's Gross Monthly Income: $72,500. Ms. Fonseca's total annual compensation from Luminos Entertainment Group, Inc. is approximately $870,000, comprised of (i) a base salary of $485,000, (ii) an average annual performance bonus of approximately $210,000 (based on a three-year trailing average), and (iii) annual restricted stock unit ("RSU") vesting of approximately $175,000.
Mr. Medrano's Imputed Gross Monthly Income: $28,333. Based on the forensic accounting analysis conducted by Harold K. Yamamoto, CPA/ABV/CFF, of Yamamoto Brace & Liu, LLP, Mr. Medrano's three-year average annual income through his wholly-owned production services entity, Medrano Visuals, LLC, is approximately $340,000. Given the variable nature of Mr. Medrano's freelance income—which has ranged from approximately $215,000 in lower-earning years to approximately $480,000 in peak years—Mr. Yamamoto's analysis imputes income based on the three-year trailing average as the most reliable measure of Mr. Medrano's earning capacity.
Combined Gross Monthly Income: $100,833.
Based on a DissoMaster calculation using the foregoing income figures, a two-child household, and the proposed 63.6% / 36.4% timeshare, the California guideline child support obligation is $1,274 per month, payable by Ms. Fonseca to Mr. Medrano.
Ms. Fonseca proposes an agreed deviation from guideline to $1,100 per month—a reduction of $174 per month below the guideline figure. This deviation is justified under California Family Code Section 4057(b) by the fact that Mr. Medrano would, under the proposed plan, assume a disproportionately higher share of the children's extracurricular activity costs (as set forth in Section IV.F below). When the additional extracurricular cost burden on Mr. Medrano is taken into account, the overall financial arrangement remains consistent with the children's needs and the statutory objectives of the child support guidelines. The proposed stipulated amount remains well above any floor that would be inconsistent with the children's best interests.
F. Education and Extracurricular Costs
Tuition at Ridgeview Academy. Ms. Fonseca proposes that tuition costs at Ridgeview Academy be allocated 70% to Ms. Fonseca and 30% to Mr. Medrano, as follows:
This allocation reflects the proportional disparity in the parties' incomes while ensuring that both parents contribute meaningfully to the children's educational expenses.
Extracurricular and Enrichment Activities. Costs for extracurricular and enrichment activities for each child—including but not limited to organized sports, music lessons, art classes, tutoring, and summer enrichment camps—would be split 60% Mr. Medrano and 40% Ms. Fonseca for activities costing up to $1,500 per child per quarter. Any single activity or combination of activities the cost of which would exceed the $1,500 per child per quarter cap would require the mutual written consent of both parents before enrollment.
The higher extracurricular cost share borne by Mr. Medrano is the express quid pro quo for the $174 per month downward deviation in base child support. When the extracurricular cost-sharing arrangement is viewed in conjunction with the guideline deviation, the overall financial framework is equitable and ensures that neither parent bears a disproportionate share of the children's total expenses relative to income.
G. Healthcare. The proposed plan provides that the children shall remain enrolled on Ms. Fonseca's employer-sponsored health insurance plan, which is administered by Veridian Health Insurance Co. through Luminos Entertainment Group, Inc. Ms. Fonseca's plan provides comprehensive medical, dental, and vision coverage for dependent children, and the children have been continuously enrolled on this plan since birth.
Unreimbursed medical, dental, orthodontic, and mental health expenses—including co-pays, deductibles, and any costs not covered by the Veridian plan—would be allocated 70% to Ms. Fonseca and 30% to Mr. Medrano, consistent with the overall income-proportional framework used for tuition allocation.
H. Annual Review
Child support under the proposed agreement would be subject to review on the anniversary of the entry of the order, or earlier upon a material change in circumstances. For purposes of this provision, a "material change in circumstances" is defined as (i) a change in either parent's gross income exceeding fifteen percent (15%), or (ii) a change in the custodial timeshare exceeding ten percent (10%). This definition is intended to provide clarity and predictability, reduce litigation over the threshold for modification, and ensure that the support order remains responsive to changes in the parties' financial circumstances and the children's living arrangements.
I. Parenting Plan Coordinator
Ms. Fonseca proposes that the parties jointly appoint a Parenting Plan Coordinator to assist in resolving day-to-day scheduling disputes and implementation issues without the need to return to court. We propose Dr. Marcus W. Ingalls, LMFT (California License No. LMFT 89412), of Ingalls & Cuevas Family Counseling, located at 10880 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 630, Los Angeles, California 90024, for this role. Dr. Ingalls has extensive experience serving as a parenting plan coordinator in high-conflict and complex family law matters in the Los Angeles area, and his office is conveniently located for both parties. The appointment of a coordinator would provide a structured, efficient, and cost-effective mechanism for addressing the inevitable logistical questions and minor scheduling adjustments that arise in any shared custody arrangement, and would be particularly valuable here given the demands of both parents' professional lives in the entertainment industry.
We welcome your input on this proposal, including any alternative candidates you believe would be well-suited to the role.
J. Confidentiality and Non-Disparagement
Finally, the proposed agreement includes mutual non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions. Neither party would disparage the other in the presence of the children or in any public forum. Additionally, neither party would disclose the financial terms of the agreement or the contents of the custody evaluation to any third party, except to their respective legal counsel, tax advisors, or as required by court order.
These provisions are consistent with the Stipulation and Order to Seal the Court File entered on July 14, 2023, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 2.550 et seq. Given both parents' public-facing roles in the entertainment industry—and the particular vulnerability of the children to unwanted public attention—Ms. Fonseca considers these protections to be of significant importance and a core component of any settlement agreement.
V. Reference to the Custody Evaluation
As noted above, Dr. Sorensen's custody evaluation report was delivered to all counsel of record on October 6, 2023. We have reviewed the report in detail. Without disclosing the specific contents of the evaluation in this correspondence—consistent with the confidentiality protections surrounding the report—we note that the principal terms of the proposed parenting plan are consistent with and supported by the evaluator's findings and recommendations. Dr. Sorensen's assessment of the children's adjustment under the current custodial arrangement, the quality of each parent's relationship with the children, and the developmental needs of each child informed our drafting of the proposed terms in meaningful ways.
We would welcome the opportunity to discuss the report's conclusions with you at your convenience, subject to the applicable confidentiality protections. If you believe a joint conference call with all counsel to review the evaluation findings would be productive in advance of the mediation session, we are amenable to that approach as well.
VI. Request for Your Input
We respectfully request that you review the enclosed proposed parenting plan and the accompanying Exhibits A and B at your earliest convenience. We would be grateful for your written position on the proposals, including any specific modifications, alternative recommendations, or additional provisions that you believe would better serve the best interests of Isabela and Mateo, in advance of the November 17, 2023 mediation session before the Honorable Constance M. Yee (Ret.).
Ms. Fonseca's primary objective throughout these proceedings has been—and remains—to reach a comprehensive settlement through mediation that promotes stability, continuity, and emotional well-being for both children. She is committed to a collaborative process and is prepared to consider reasonable modifications to any of the terms outlined herein in the interest of achieving a resolution that all parties, including Minor's Counsel, can support.
We also wish to extend an invitation for you to participate in the mediation sessions if you believe that your presence would be beneficial to the process and to the children's interests. Please be advised that both the mediator, the Honorable Constance M. Yee (Ret.), and opposing counsel at Kwan, Delacroix & Samuels LLP have been notified of the substance and transmittal of this letter.
VII. Availability and Contact
I am available to meet in person or to confer by telephone at your earliest convenience to discuss any aspect of the proposed parenting plan or the upcoming mediation. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly at the following:
Devon Archer Calderwood & Harkness LLP 777 South Flower Street, Suite 3400 Los Angeles, California 90017 Telephone: (213) 555-7200 Direct Dial: (213) 555-7218
Email: d.archer@calderwoodharkness.com
For any matters requiring partner-level discussion, please feel free to contact Priya Anand, Esq., who serves as the billing partner on this engagement and is fully apprised of all aspects of the matter. Ms. Anand can be reached at (213) 555-7205 or p.anand@calderwoodharkness.com.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and for your continued dedication to Isabela's and Mateo's well-being. We look forward to hearing from you.
Very truly yours,
CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP
By: ________
Devon Archer Associate
Enclosures:
1. Draft Proposed Stipulated Custody & Parenting Plan Agreement
2. Draft Exhibit A — Holiday & Vacation Schedule
3. Draft Exhibit B — Right of First Refusal & Travel Notice Protocol
cc: Marguerite D. Fonseca (client) (via email) cc: Priya Anand, Esq., Calderwood & Harkness LLP (via email)
Note: This letter and its enclosures are directed solely to Minor's Counsel in her capacity under California Family Code Section 3150 and have not been transmitted to opposing counsel.
Child | Annual Tuition | Ms. Fonseca (70%) | Mr. Medrano (30%)
Isabela | $32,400 | $22,680 | $9,720
Mateo | $26,800 | $18,760 | $8,040
Total | $59,200 | $41,440 | $17,760

CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP

Record

Parties

Dates

Amounts