DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CPF15514665·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing 4 months agoCONTINUED

ERIN WIDEN VS. THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Enforce Settlement Agreement And Request For Attorneys Fees And Costs (Ccp 664.6)

Hearing date
Apr 17, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
May 11, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffERIN WIDEN
DefendantTHE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CPF15514665 - April 17, 2026 Hearing date: April 17, 2026 Case number: CPF15514665 Case title: ERIN WIDEN VS. THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Case Number: | | CPF15514665 | Case Title: | | ERIN WIDEN VS. THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO | Court Date: | | 2026-04-17 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Enforce Settlement Agreement And Request For Attorneys Fees And Costs (Ccp 664.6) | Rulings: | |

On the Real Property/Housing Motion calendar for April 17, 2026, line 1. Cross Complainants' Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement and Request for Attorneys Fees and Costs (CCP 664.6) is continued to May 11, 2026 on the Court's own motion. =(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