DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD24676553·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 10 months agoCONTINUED

MB PROPERTY GROUP VS. COLIN ARLEN ET AL

Notice And Motion For Enforcement Of Settlement Agreement And Entry Of Judgment Pursuant To Ccp Section 664.6

Hearing date
Oct 28, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Nov 5, 2025

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffMB PROPERTY GROUP
DefendantCOLIN ARLEN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD24676553 - October 28, 2025 Hearing date: October 28, 2025 Case number: CUD24676553 Case title: MB PROPERTY GROUP VS. COLIN ARLEN ET AL Case Number: | | CUD24676553 | Case Title: | | MB PROPERTY GROUP VS. COLIN ARLEN ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-10-28 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice And Motion For Enforcement Of Settlement Agreement And Entry Of Judgment Pursuant To Ccp Section 664.6 | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for October 28, 2025.

Line 5. PLAINTIFF's Motion For Enforcement Of Settlement Agreement And Entry Of Judgment Pursuant To Ccp Section 664.6 is continued to November 5, 2025 to be heard by the Honorable Michelle Tong, per the order of the presiding judge. =(501/CFH) Parties may appear in-person, or via Zoom (Video - Meeting ID: 160 4132 4666; Password: 872834).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