DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC23608302·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 9 months agoGRANTED

EMI J. YOSHIDA ET AL VS. 479 LOS PALMOS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED ET AL

MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

Hearing date
Dec 4, 2025
Department
501
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffEMI J. YOSHIDA
Defendant479 LOS PALMOS, LLC
DefendantSILICON VALLEY REAL VENTURES, LLC

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC23608302 - December 4, 2025 Hearing date: December 4, 2025 Case number: CGC23608302 Case title: EMI J. YOSHIDA ET AL VS. 479 LOS PALMOS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED ET AL Case Number: | | CGC23608302 | Case Title: | | EMI J. YOSHIDA ET AL VS. 479 LOS PALMOS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-12-04 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for December 4, 2025. Line 3.

DEFENDANT SILICON VALLEY REAL VENTURES, LLC MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD; is GRANTED. No opposition filed. Counsel to prepare an order. =(501/AAT)

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