DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
CUD26681222·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
SUSTAINED in part and OVERRULED in part.

BRIDGE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY VS. MARVELL HARRIS

DEMURRER to Amended ANSWER to COMPLAINT

Hearing date
May 6, 2026
Department
501
Judge
Prevailing
Mixed

Motion type

Demurrer

Parties

PlaintiffBRIDGE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY
DefendantMARVELL HARRIS

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD26681222 - May 6, 2026 Hearing date: May 6, 2026 Case number: CUD26681222 Case title: BRIDGE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY VS. MARVELL HARRIS Case Number: | | CUD26681222 | Case Title: | | BRIDGE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY VS. MARVELL HARRIS | Court Date: | | 2026-05-06 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | DEMURRER to Amended ANSWER to COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for May 6, 2026. Line 11.

PLAINTIFF BRIDGE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY DEMURRER to Amended ANSWER to COMPLAINT is SUSTAINED in part and OVERRULED in part.

As to the affirmative defenses stated in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Amended Answer, the demurrer is sustained without leave to amend. As to the affirmative defense stated in paragraph 10 of the Amended Answer, the demurrer is sustained, with leave to amend within 5 days of notice of entry of order if Defendant so chooses. The demurrer is otherwise overruled. =(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 so 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