DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
CGC24617962·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
CONTINUED

CEPHEUS DAVIS ET AL VS. MISSION HOTEL, LLC ET AL

Notice Of Motion To Amend Operative Complaint To Substitute Successor-In-Interest For Deceased Plaintiff

Hearing date
Mar 24, 2026
Department
501
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Apr 10, 2026

Motion type

Other

Parties

PlaintiffCEPHEUS DAVIS
DefendantMISSION HOTEL, LLC

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24617962 - March 24, 2026 Hearing date: March 24, 2026 Case number: CGC24617962 Case title: CEPHEUS DAVIS ET AL VS. MISSION HOTEL, LLC ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24617962 | Case Title: | | CEPHEUS DAVIS ET AL VS. MISSION HOTEL, LLC ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-03-24 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion To Amend Operative Complaint To Substitute Successor-In-Interest For Deceased Plaintiff | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for March 24, 2026. Line 3.

PLAINTIFFS' Motion To Amend Operative Complaint To Substitute Successor-In-Interest For Deceased Plaintiff is continued to April 10, 2026, for the moving party to comply with LRSF 2.7B and provide courtesy copies of the moving papers no later than April 3, 2026 with a cover letter reflecting the new hearing date. =(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…

Extracted by Gemini Flash 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?”

Powered by Gemini Flash Lite. Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Source

Share