DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC21594429·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 9 months agoCONTINUED

KENNETH WILLIAMS VS. SERVE ALL, HELP ALL, INC., DBA TEH NONPROFIT ET AL

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

Hearing date
Nov 25, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Dec 5, 2025

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffKENNETH WILLIAMS
DefendantSERVE ALL, HELP ALL, INC., DBA TEH NONPROFIT
DefendantELIZABETH POE-ABAD
DefendantFAITH FIRST BANCORP, INC.

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC21594429 - November 25, 2025 Hearing date: November 25, 2025 Case number: CGC21594429 Case title: KENNETH WILLIAMS VS. SERVE ALL, HELP ALL, INC., DBA TEH NONPROFIT ET AL Case Number: | | CGC21594429 | Case Title: | | KENNETH WILLIAMS VS. SERVE ALL, HELP ALL, INC., DBA TEH NONPROFIT ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-11-25 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for November 25, 2025. Line 2.2.

DEFENDANT ELIZABETH POE-ABAD, FAITH FIRST BANCORP, INC. MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS is continued to December 5, 2025 to be heard with other pending motions. =(501/HEK)

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