DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC26635449·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

NATHAN PAUL BOLEY ET AL VS. RANDI CHENG ET AL

DEMURRER to COMPLAINT

Hearing date
Jul 7, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jul 23, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffNATHAN PAUL BOLEY
DefendantRANDI CHENG
DefendantMICHAEL ZHU
DefendantLILIAN LAU
DefendantTAI TAM
DefendantTONY TAM
DefendantANGELA TAM
DefendantBERNARD DETHIERS
DefendantYOK CHUI
DefendantMICHAEL CHUI
DefendantKYLN LAM
DefendantSUI TAM

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC26635449 - July 7, 2026 Hearing date: July 7, 2026 Case number: CGC26635449 Case title: NATHAN PAUL BOLEY ET AL VS. RANDI CHENG ET AL Case Number: | | CGC26635449 | Case Title: | | NATHAN PAUL BOLEY ET AL VS. RANDI CHENG ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-07-07 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | DEMURRER to COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for July 7, 2026. Line 4.

DEFENDANT RANDI CHENG, MICHAEL ZHU, LILIAN LAU, TAI TAM, TONY TAM, ANGELA TAM, BERNARD DETHIERS, YOK CHUI, MICHAEL CHUI, KYLN LAM, SUI TAM DEMURRER to COMPLAINT is transferred to department 301 to be heard on July 23, 2026 at 9:00 a.m., per the order of the presiding judge. =(501/CFH)

Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849).

Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required.

Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests.

A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not notified, and the opposing party does not appear. | |

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