DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CPF25519144·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 7 months agoCONTINUED

PARKFRONT INVESTMENTS LLC VS. KOKKARI LTD.

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Attorney'S Fees

Hearing date
Jan 22, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Feb 11, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Attorney Fees rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffPARKFRONT INVESTMENTS LLC
RespondentKOKKARI LTD.

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CPF25519144 - January 22, 2026 Hearing date: January 22, 2026 Case number: CPF25519144 Case title: PARKFRONT INVESTMENTS LLC VS. KOKKARI LTD. Case Number: | | CPF25519144 | Case Title: | | PARKFRONT INVESTMENTS LLC VS. KOKKARI LTD. | Court Date: | | 2026-01-22 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Attorney'S Fees | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for January 22, 2026. Line 1.

RESPONDENT KOKKARI LTD., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Notice Of Motion And Motion For Attorney'S Fees is continued to February 11, 2026 for opposing party to deliver courtesy copies of the opposition papers to department 501 no later than February 2, 2026 with a cover letter reflecting the new hearing date. (moving and reply received). =(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