DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC23606372·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 10 months agoDENIED in light of the ruling on the demurrer. The Court will allow an amendment to the newly alleged cause of action for negligent misrepresentation.

WILL FREDERICKS ET AL VS. ROBERT FELTER ET AL

MOTION TO STRIKE Amended CROSS COMPLAINT

Hearing date
Oct 22, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Strike rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

PlaintiffWILL FREDERICKS
DefendantROBERT FELTER
Cross-DefendantSOTHEBY'S INTERNATIONAL REALTY, INC.
Cross-DefendantSCOTT BRITTAIN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC23606372 - October 22, 2025 Hearing date: October 22, 2025 Case number: CGC23606372 Case title: WILL FREDERICKS ET AL VS. ROBERT FELTER ET AL Case Number: | | CGC23606372 | Case Title: | | WILL FREDERICKS ET AL VS. ROBERT FELTER ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-10-22 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION TO STRIKE Amended CROSS COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for October 22, 2025. Line 1.2.

CROSS DEFENDANT SOTHEBY'S INTERNATIONAL REALTY, INC., SCOTT BRITTAIN MOTION TO STRIKE Amended CROSS COMPLAINT is DENIED in light of the ruling on the demurrer. The Court will allow an amendment to the newly alleged cause of action for negligent misrepresentation. =(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