Petition for Adjudication and Approval of Option Agreement by Receiver
SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Department 12 Honorable Nahal Iravani-Sani, Presiding Courtroom Clerk, Ryan Nguyen 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113 Telephone: (408) 882-2230
DATE: 07/01/2026 TIME: 9:00 A.M. and 9:01 A.M.
LINE # CASE # CASE TITLE RULING LINE 1 22CV406880 Sriadhibhatla Chainulu Motion to Set Aside Default/Judgment vs Ajit Sanzgiri et al Please Ctrl Click (or scroll down to) Line 1 LINE 2 24CV428712 Belen Ibanez Motion to Compel vs Javier Ibanez et al Please Ctrl Click on (or scroll down to) Line 3 LINE 3 24CV444998 City of San Jose, a Petition for Adjudication and Approval of Option Agreement by Receiver charter city vs Kim Ho et al. Please Ctrl Click on (or scroll down to) Line 3 LINE 4 25CV472064 Jpmorgan Chase Bank, Motion to Set Aside Default/Judgment N.a. vs Sukhjeev Singh Please Ctrl Click (or scroll down to) Line 4 LINES 5 - 25CV476569 Greg Gianotti Demurrer & Motion to Strike vs 6 Salacup Nardito et al.
Please Ctrl Click (or scroll down to) Line 5 LINE 7 25CV479084 Sandeep Pal vs Denodo Petition Compel Arbitration Technologies Inc. Please Ctrl Click on (or scroll down to) Line 7 LINE 8 25CV47984 Pedram Bigdeli et al. Hearing: Petition Compel Arbitration vs Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC Please Ctrl Click on (or scroll down to) Line 8
Calendar Line 3 Case Name: City of San Jose v Kim Thuy Ho Receiver: Gerard F. Keena Case No.: 24CV444998
Petition for Adjudication and Approval of Option Agreement by Receiver
The Court has considered the Petition, the opposition, and reply. The Court finds that the present record demonstrates the existence of multiple related actions involving the subject property, including the 2024 receivership action presently before this Court, the 2025 quiet title action presently assigned to this department (25CV470868 – pending next court date of July 8, 2026), and an additional quiet title action currently pending in Department 10, scheduled for August 12, 2026.)
In light of the overlapping issues of ownership, title, and administration of the receivership estate, the Court concludes that the orderly coordination of these proceedings should precede any determination regarding the Receiver's proposed Option Agreement, disposition of the property, or termination of the receivership. The Court is concerned that substantive rulings in separate actions could result in unnecessary duplication or inconsistent rulings absent coordinated case management.
Accordingly, the Court declines at this time to adjudicate the competing ownership claims or to approve the proposed Option Agreement.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
The Court further declines at this time to terminate the receivership. However, the Court notes the parties' competing positions regarding the necessity and continued expense of the receivership and the extent of rehabilitation accomplished since the Receiver's appointment in August 2024. Those issues remain relevant to the continued administration of the receivership and will be addressed following coordinated case management.
The Court orders all counsel, the Receiver, and any self-represented parties to appear for a coordinated scheduling and case management conference. Parties shall be prepared to address, among other things:
1. The procedural posture of all pending actions involving the property; 2. Whether any actions should be related, coordinated, stayed, or otherwise managed to avoid inconsistent rulings; 3. Which action should proceed first to adjudicate the ownership issues; 4. A proposed schedule for bringing all remaining litigation concerning the property to final resolution.
The Receiver shall file, no later than fourteen (14) court days before the continued hearing, a comprehensive status report setting forth: (1) all rehabilitation work completed to date; (2) all work remaining; (3) all receivership expenditures incurred since appointment; (4) all Receiver's Certificates issued and outstanding; (5) the current code enforcement status of the property; and (6) the Receiver's recommendation regarding the future administration of the receivership in light of the pending ownership litigation.
The Petition is continued to a date to be determined on July 1, 2026.