DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25679228·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 9 months agoOFF CALENDAR

ZHUO DONG LIN VS. KAREN DER-CHEN HAO ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reconsideration

Hearing date
Nov 17, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Reconsideration rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffZHUO DONG LIN
DefendantKAREN DER-CHEN HAO
DefendantKAREN HAO

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25679228 - November 17, 2025 Hearing date: November 17, 2025 Case number: CUD25679228 Case title: ZHUO DONG LIN VS. KAREN DER-CHEN HAO ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25679228 | Case Title: | | ZHUO DONG LIN VS. KAREN DER-CHEN HAO ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-11-17 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reconsideration | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for November 17, 2025. Line 8.1. DEFENDANT KAREN HAO ERRONEOUSLY SUED AS KAREN DER-CHEN HAO Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reconsideration is OFF CALENDAR.

Insufficient notice per CCP 1005(b). Additionally, proof of service does not indicate the method of service and include all required information per CCP 1013b. =(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