DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24611610·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 10 months agoCONTINUED

DAVID CHIA JR. ET AL VS. SHOMEN KUNG CHIA ET AL

Motion And Notice Of Hearing To Appoint Referee

Hearing date
Oct 14, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Oct 30, 2025

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffDAVID CHIA JR.
PlaintiffDANIEL CHIA
PlaintiffTRACY CHIA
PlaintiffDAVIDSON CHIA
DefendantSHOMEN KUNG CHIA

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24611610 - October 14, 2025 Hearing date: October 14, 2025 Case number: CGC24611610 Case title: DAVID CHIA JR. ET AL VS. SHOMEN KUNG CHIA ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24611610 | Case Title: | | DAVID CHIA JR. ET AL VS. SHOMEN KUNG CHIA ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-10-14 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Motion And Notice Of Hearing To Appoint Referee | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for October 14, 2025. Line 3.

PLAINTIFF DAVID CHIA JR., DANIEL CHIA, TRACY CHIA, DAVIDSON CHIA Motion And Notice Of Hearing To Appoint Referee is continued to October 30, 2025 for the moving party to deliver a courtesy copy of reply no later than October 17, 2025 with a cover letter reflecting the new hearing date. (moving and opposition received). =(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