DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD26682276·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 1 day agoDENIED

CP CLEMENT, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY VS. DOE 1 ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For An Order To Show Cause Why The Fictitiously Named Defendants Should Not Be Dismissed

Hearing date
Aug 17, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffCP CLEMENT, LLC
DefendantDOE 1

Attorneys

David Silvermanfor Defendant

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD26682276 - August 17, 2026 Hearing date: August 17, 2026 Case number: CUD26682276 Case title: CP CLEMENT, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY VS. DOE 1 ET AL Case Number: | | CUD26682276 | Case Title: | | CP CLEMENT, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY VS. DOE 1 ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-08-17 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For An Order To Show Cause Why The Fictitiously Named Defendants Should Not Be Dismissed; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities; Declaration Of David Silverman? The Real.Party Being Sued Under The Fictitious Name Of Doe 1; Exhibit A | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for August 17, 2026. Line 11.1. DEFENDANT Motion for OSC Why Fictitiously Named Defendants Should Not be Dismissed is DENIED. No authority cited for this relief.=(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