DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD24674462·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing 8 months agoOFF CALENDAR

25 ESSEX L.P. VS. DARRYL BROWN ET AL

Motion For Entry Of Judgment Pursuant To Stipulation

Hearing date
Dec 9, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

Plaintiff25 ESSEX L.P.
DefendantDARRYL BROWN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD24674462 - December 9, 2025 Hearing date: December 9, 2025 Case number: CUD24674462 Case title: 25 ESSEX L.P. VS. DARRYL BROWN ET AL Case Number: | | CUD24674462 | Case Title: | | 25 ESSEX L.P. VS. DARRYL BROWN ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-12-09 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Motion For Entry Of Judgment Pursuant To Stipulation | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for December 9, 2025. Line 5.

PLAINTIFF 25 ESSEX L.P. Motion For Entry Of Judgment Pursuant To Stipulation; is OFF CALENDAR. Moving papers were not served to the Defendant. Service on Defendant's limited scope attorney only is insufficient. The Court notes that this is the second time Plaintiff has filed a motion in this action which has been taken off calendar for this reason.=(501/MEW)

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