DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD24676465·sf·Civil·Unlawful Detainer
Hearing 10 months agoGRANTED in part. Judgment shall enter in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant for possession of the premises. Request for monetary damages is denied.

365 FULTON, L.P VS. PAULINE CLARK ET AL

Motion For Entry Of Judgment Pursuant To Stipulation

Hearing date
Nov 7, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Mixed

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

Plaintiff365 FULTON, L.P
DefendantPAULINE CLARK

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for November 7, 2025. Line 11. PLAINTIFF 365 FULTON, L.P Motion For Entry Of Judgment Pursuant To Stipulation is GRANTED in part. No opposition filed.

Judgment shall enter in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant for possession of the premises. Request for monetary damages is denied. Nothing in paragraph 4 of the Stipulation states that Defendant is personally responsible for paying the amount in that paragraph, under any circumstances. As the amounts already paid by Defendant pursuant to the Stipulation exceed the remaining amount of damages now requested, Plaintiff has not shown that it is entitled to any amount of damages under the Stipulation. =(501/REQ)

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