DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25680538·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 8 months agoDENIED, 5 days to answer from notice of entry of order. The Complaint is properly verified in accordance with CCP 446.

DE WOLF REALTY CO. VS. SIOBHAN TOWN ET AL

MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT

Hearing date
Dec 16, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Strike rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffDE WOLF REALTY CO.
DefendantSIOBHAN TOWN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25680538 - December 16, 2025 Hearing date: December 16, 2025 Case number: CUD25680538 Case title: DE WOLF REALTY CO. VS. SIOBHAN TOWN ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25680538 | Case Title: | | DE WOLF REALTY CO. VS. SIOBHAN TOWN ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-12-16 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for December 16, 2025. Line 11. DEFENDANT SIOBHAN TOWN MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT; is DENIED, 5 days to answer from notice of entry of order.

The Complaint is properly verified in accordance with CCP 446. =(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