DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25680558·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 7 months agoCONTINUED

LAN LE VS. BAI TIAN TAN ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Defendant'S Motion To Have Plaintiff Lan Le Declared A Vexatious Litigant

Hearing date
Jan 21, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jan 23, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffLAN LE
DefendantBAI TIAN TAN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25680558 - January 21, 2026 Hearing date: January 21, 2026 Case number: CUD25680558 Case title: LAN LE VS. BAI TIAN TAN ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25680558 | Case Title: | | LAN LE VS. BAI TIAN TAN ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-01-21 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Defendant'S Motion To Have Plaintiff Lan Le Declared A Vexatious Litigant | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for January 21, 2026. Line 10.

DEFENDANT BAI TAN Notice Of Motion And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Defendant'S Motion To Have Plaintiff Lan Le Declared A Vexatious Litigant is continued to January 23, 2026 on the Court's own motion. =(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