DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC25630026·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing todayCONTINUED

HONG LUO ET AL VS. 1220 LA PLAYA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION ET AL

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO File Cross-Complaint Against Kanfu Zheng

Hearing date
Aug 24, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Oct 2, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffHONG LUO
Defendant1220 LA PLAYA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
PlaintiffRen
OtherKanfu Zheng

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC25630026 - August 24, 2026 Hearing date: August 24, 2026 Case number: CGC25630026 Case title: HONG LUO ET AL VS. 1220 LA PLAYA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION ET AL Case Number: | | CGC25630026 | Case Title: | | HONG LUO ET AL VS. 1220 LA PLAYA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-08-24 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR LEAVE TO File Cross-Complaint Against Kanfu Zheng | Rulings: | | On the Real Property/Housing Court Motion calendar for August 24, 2026, line 5.

Plaintiff Ren's Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint Against Kanfu Zheng is continued to October 2, 2026 for the moving party to provide courtesy copies of the moving papers no later than September 18, 2026 with a cover letter reflecting new hearing date. (Opposition received). =(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