DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25678675·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 6 months agoDENIED

TENTH AND MARKET, LLC VS. FAYRENE LITTLE ET AL

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Against Defendant Fayrene Little

Hearing date
Feb 26, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Summary Judgment rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffTENTH AND MARKET, LLC
DefendantFAYRENE LITTLE

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25678675 - February 26, 2026 Hearing date: February 26, 2026 Case number: CUD25678675 Case title: TENTH AND MARKET, LLC VS. FAYRENE LITTLE ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25678675 | Case Title: | | TENTH AND MARKET, LLC VS. FAYRENE LITTLE ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-02-26 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Against Defendant Fayrene Little | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for February 26, 2026. Line 5.

PLAINTIFF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Against Defendant Fayrene Little; is DENIED. Moving party failed to carry its burden. No competent admissible evidence provided regarding breach or tenant's continued possession of the premises. =(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