DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25677354·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 10 months agoGRANTED

COLOMBIA MISSION BAY LLC VS. YEON KYUNG LEE ET AL

MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT

Hearing date
Nov 4, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffCOLOMBIA MISSION BAY LLC
DefendantYEON KYUNG LEE

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for November 4, 2025. Line 4. DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT is GRANTED, pursuant to the Court's authority under CCP 473(d). The notice of Plaintiff's September 11, 2025 ex parte application, directing Defendant to Room 402 of the courthouse at 400 McAllister Street, was defective, as this is not where Plaintiff's application was heard. The judgment entered on September 11, 2025 is vacated. The writ issued on September 15, 2025 is recalled.

Plaintiff may re-file its ex parte application upon proper notice of said application =(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 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