DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24612352·sf·Civil·Partition of Real Property
Hearing 5 months agoOFF CALENDAR

TIFFANY J. SPURLOCK VS. RONALD J. HILL ET AL

APPOINTING APPRAISER FOR SAN FRANCISCO PROPERTY UNDER THE PARTITION OF REAL PROPERTY ACT

Hearing date
Mar 27, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffTIFFANY J. SPURLOCK
DefendantRONALD J. HILL

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for March 27, 2026. Line 2. APPOINTING APPRAISER FOR SAN FRANCISCO PROPERTY UNDER THE PARTITION OF REAL PROPERTY ACT is OFF CALENDAR. No appraisal on file. Within 2 business days of the filing of the appraisal parties to appear ex-parte to set a hearing date for CCP 874.316(f) hearing. Parties to prepare a form of Notice per CCP 974.316(e). =(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 so 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