DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24613200·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 7 months agoOFF CALENDAR per request of the moving party.

NICHOLAS LUDWIGSEN ET AL VS. ALI SHAFIE ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Order To Disqualify Bay Legal P.C. As Counsel

Hearing date
Jan 23, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffNICHOLAS LUDWIGSEN
DefendantALI SHAFIE
DefendantTRICIA SHAFIE

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24613200 - January 23, 2026 Hearing date: January 23, 2026 Case number: CGC24613200 Case title: NICHOLAS LUDWIGSEN ET AL VS. ALI SHAFIE ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24613200 | Case Title: | | NICHOLAS LUDWIGSEN ET AL VS. ALI SHAFIE ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-01-23 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Order To Disqualify Bay Legal P.C. As Counsel | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for January 23, 2026.

Line 4. DEFENDANT ALI SHAFIE, TRICIA SHAFIE Motion For Order To Disqualify Bay Legal P.C. As Counsel is OFF CALENDAR per request of the moving party. =(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