DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC23608560·sf·Civil·Civil
Hearing 10 months agoPending

366 GEARY STREET, LLC, ET AL VS. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ET AL

Motion To Compel Plaintiff Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts, Inc.'S Further Responses To Request For Production Of Documents, Set One; Request For Sanctions In The Amount Of $1,210.00

Hearing date
Oct 15, 2025
Department
302
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$1,210.00

Parties

Plaintiff366 GEARY STREET, LLC
DefendantCITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
PlaintiffCHALK & VERMILION FINE ARTS, INC.
Defendant386 GEARY STREET REAL ESTATE LLC

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 302 - CGC23608560 - October 15, 2025 Hearing date: October 15, 2025 Case number: CGC23608560 Case title: 366 GEARY STREET, LLC, ET AL VS. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ET AL Case Number: | | CGC23608560 | Case Title: | | 366 GEARY STREET, LLC, ET AL VS. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-10-15 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Compel Plaintiff Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts, Inc.'S Further Responses To Request For Production Of Documents, Set One; Request For Sanctions In The Amount Of $1,210.00; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities | Rulings: | | Matter on calendar for Wednesday, October 15, 2025, Line, DEFENDANT 386 GEARY STREET REAL ESTATE LLC's Motion To Compel Plaintiff Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts, Inc.'s Further Responses To Request For Production Of Documents, Set One; Request For Sanctions In The Amount Of $1,210.00. | |

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