DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25677552·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing 9 months agoHearing Required

1190 MISSION ST LP VS. LIBAAN HUSSEIN ET AL

Motion For Judgment Pursuant To Stipulation

Hearing date
Nov 19, 2025
Department
505
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

Plaintiff1190 MISSION ST LP
DefendantLIBAAN HUSSEIN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25677552 - November 19, 2025 Hearing date: November 19, 2025 Case number: CUD25677552 Case title: 1190 MISSION ST LP VS. LIBAAN HUSSEIN ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25677552 | Case Title: | | 1190 MISSION ST LP VS. LIBAAN HUSSEIN ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-11-19 13:30 PM | Calendar Matter: | | Motion For Judgment Pursuant To Stipulation | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for November 19, 2025. Line 9. PLAINTIFF 1190 MISSION ST LP Motion For Judgment Pursuant To Stipulation; Hearing Required regarding the status of Defendant's rental assistance application.

This matter will be heard in department 505 by the Honorable Michelle Tong at 1:30 p.m. per the order of the presiding judge. =(505/MT) 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