DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25679228·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 7 months agoOFF CALENDAR for lack of jurisdiction.

ZHUO DONG LIN VS. KAREN DER-CHEN HAO ET AL

Motion To Dismiss Case As To Defendant Hao And For Sanctions Against Plaintiff And Counsel

Hearing date
Jan 30, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Dismiss rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffZHUO DONG LIN
DefendantKAREN DER-CHEN HAO
DefendantKAREN HAO

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25679228 - January 30, 2026 Hearing date: January 30, 2026 Case number: CUD25679228 Case title: ZHUO DONG LIN VS. KAREN DER-CHEN HAO ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25679228 | Case Title: | | ZHUO DONG LIN VS. KAREN DER-CHEN HAO ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-01-30 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Motion To Dismiss Case As To Defendant Hao And For Sanctions Against Plaintiff And Counsel | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for January 30, 2026. Line 8.2. DEFENDANT KAREN HAO ERRONEOUSLY SUED AS KAREN DER-CHEN HAO Motion To Dismiss Case As To Defendant Hao And For Sanctions Against Plaintiff And Counsel is OFF CALENDAR for lack of jurisdiction.

This action is currently pending appeal in the Appellate Division. =(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