DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD24676316·sf·Civil·Unlawful Detainer
Hearing 7 months agoOFF CALENDAR

T. WISEAU VS. JOE ABUZAID ET AL

Amended Notice Of Motion And Motion For Re-Classification Of Unlawful Detainer Case From Limited To Unlimited

Hearing date
Jan 29, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffT. WISEAU
DefendantJOE ABUZAID

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD24676316 - January 29, 2026 Hearing date: January 29, 2026 Case number: CUD24676316 Case title: T. WISEAU VS. JOE ABUZAID ET AL Case Number: | | CUD24676316 | Case Title: | | T. WISEAU VS. JOE ABUZAID ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-01-29 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Amended Notice Of Motion And Motion For Re-Classification Of Unlawful Detainer Acse From Limited To Unlimited | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for January 29, 2026. Line 6.

PLAINTIFF T. WISEAU Motion For Re-Classification Of Unlawful Detainer Case From Limited To Unlimited is OFF CALENDAR. No supporting memorandum. (CRC 3.1112(a).)

The Court notes that despite the designation of this motion as an "amended" motion, it is in fact separate and distinct from the previous motion filed by Plaintiff requesting completely different relief, and therefore requires payment of a separate filing fee. =(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