DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24620511·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing todayOFF CALENDAR

RASMI NASER ZEIDAN ET AL VS. METROPOLITAN BANK ET AL

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT , Or In The Alternative For Summary Adjudication Of Issues

Hearing date
Aug 18, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Summary Judgment rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffRasmi Naser Zeidan
PlaintiffBahjeh Aziz Zeidan
DefendantMetropolitan Bank

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24620511 - August 18, 2026 Hearing date: August 18, 2026 Case number: CGC24620511 Case title: RASMI NASER ZEIDAN ET AL VS. METROPOLITAN BANK ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24620511 | Case Title: | | RASMI NASER ZEIDAN ET AL VS. METROPOLITAN BANK ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-08-18 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, Or In The Alternative For Summary Adjudication Of Issues | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for August 18, 2026. Line 3.

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, Or In The Alternative For Summary Adjudication Of Issues is OFF CALENDAR. Defendant moves for summary judgment against Rasmi Naser Zeidan and Bahjeh Aziz Zeidan. Based on declaration of Shapero, Rasmi Naser Zeidan is deceased. Any action taken in the absence of the decedent would be void. =(501/SKF)

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