DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25680536·sf·Civil·Unlawful Detainer
Hearing 8 months agoHearing required.

SOJOURN PROPERTIES, INC. VS. GREGORY ELAMIN ET AL

Motion To Strike The Defective Three-Day Notice To Pay Rent Or Quit Exhibit Number 2 Of Plaintiff'S Complaint

Hearing date
Dec 17, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Strike rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSOJOURN PROPERTIES, INC.
DefendantGREGORY ELAMIN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25680536 - December 17, 2025 Hearing date: December 17, 2025 Case number: CUD25680536 Case title: SOJOURN PROPERTIES, INC. VS. GREGORY ELAMIN ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25680536 | Case Title: | | SOJOURN PROPERTIES, INC. VS. GREGORY ELAMIN ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-12-17 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Strike The Defective Three-Day Notice To Pay Rent Or Quit Exhibit Number 2 Of Plaintiff'S Complaint; And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of The Motion | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for December 17, 2025. Line 11. DEFENDANT GREGORY ELAMIN Motion To Strike The Defective Three-Day Notice To Pay Rent Or Quit Exhibit Number 2 Of Plaintiff'S Complaint; Hearing required. =(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