DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25680744·sf·Civil·Unlawful Detainer
Hearing 6 months agoDefendant's Motion to Vacate Default/Judgment is OFF CALENDAR.

MAG MANAGEMENT, INC. VS. CHRISTOPHER HOLBROOK ET AL

Notice Of Motion, Motion, Memorandum Of Points And Authorities And Declaration In Support Of Motion To Vacate Default And Judgment

Hearing date
Mar 3, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffMAG MANAGEMENT, INC.
DefendantCHRISTOPHER HOLBROOK

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25680744 - March 3, 2026 Hearing date: March 3, 2026 Case number: CUD25680744 Case title: MAG MANAGEMENT, INC. VS. CHRISTOPHER HOLBROOK ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25680744 | Case Title: | | MAG MANAGEMENT, INC. VS. CHRISTOPHER HOLBROOK ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-03-03 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion, Motion, Memorandum Of Points And Authorities And Declaration In Support Of Motion To Vacate Default And Judgment; Proposed Response; And Proposed Order | Rulings: | | Real Property / Housing Court Law and Motion calendar for March 3, 2026, line 12.

Defendant's Motion to Vacate Default/Judgment is OFF CALENDAR. No valid proof of service on file. =(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