DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25680400·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 8 months agoCONTINUED

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION VS. JOSE TORO ET AL

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT / Notice Of Motion For Summary Judgment

Hearing date
Dec 31, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jan 21, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Summary Judgment rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffHOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION
DefendantJOSE TORO ET AL

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25680400 - December 31, 2025 Hearing date: December 31, 2025 Case number: CUD25680400 Case title: HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION VS. JOSE TORO ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25680400 | Case Title: | | HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION VS. JOSE TORO ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-12-31 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT / Notice Of Motion For Summary Judgment | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for December 31, 2025. Line 4.

PLAINTIFF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION CORPORATION MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT / Notice Of Motion For Summary Judgment is continued to January 21, 2026 per the order of the presiding judge. =(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