DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD26682038·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing about 2 months agoOFF CALENDAR

TRANSBAY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY VS. CLOUD FORTRESS COWORKING LLC ET AL

MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS OR STAY OR DISMISS

Hearing date
Jul 13, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Quash rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffTRANSBAY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
DefendantCLOUD FORTRESS COWORKING LLC

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD26682038 - July 13, 2026 Hearing date: July 13, 2026 Case number: CUD26682038 Case title: TRANSBAY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY VS. CLOUD FORTRESS COWORKING LLC ET AL Case Number: | | CUD26682038 | Case Title: | | TRANSBAY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY VS. CLOUD FORTRESS COWORKING LLC ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-07-13 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS OR STAY OR DISMISS | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for July 13, 2026. Line 17.

Defendant Cloud Fortress Coworking LLC's Motion to Quash Service of Summons, Set Aside Entry of Default, and Withhold Possession Relief is OFF CALENDAR. Insufficient notice per CCP 1005(b). =(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