DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC21592568·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 10 months agoGRANTED

121 9TH STREET/788 MINNA STREET OWNERS' VS. 121 NINTH, LLC ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion Objecting To Proposed Discovery Order Of Special Master Dated 7.29.25

Hearing date
Oct 17, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

Plaintiff121 9TH STREET/788 MINNA STREET OWNERS'
Defendant121 NINTH, LLC

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Motion calendar for October 17, 2025, line 2. Cross-Complainant's Motion Objecting to Proposed Discovery Order of Special Master 7/29/25 is GRANTED as follows: Plaintiff shall respond to discovery directed to the HOA members/units affected by the issues identified in the following claims: (1) "Solar Gain overheating;" (2) "water damage to the floor in Unit 404;" (3) "cracking in the interior wall finish." =(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 so 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