DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25679686·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 10 months agoHearing required.

CENTRAL TOWERS JOINT VENTURE LLC VS. CRISTHIAN TZEK VILLAFANIA ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Order That The Truth Of Matters Be Deemed Admitted

Hearing date
Oct 29, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Discovery rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffCENTRAL TOWERS JOINT VENTURE LLC
DefendantCRISTHIAN TZEK VILLAFANIA

Attorneys

Michael Arikatfor Plaintiff
Evan J. Wynnsfor Plaintiff

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for October 29, 2025. Line 10. PLAINTIFF CENTRAL TOWERS JOINT VENTURE LLC Motion For Order That The Truth Of Matters Be Deemed Admitted Hearing required.

This is Plaintiff's second motion requesting this relief. At the hearing on the first motion, Plaintiff's counsel, Michael Arikat, represented to the Court that the responses had been received. The moving papers for the instant motion do not acknowledge the previous motion, but simply assert, via the declaration of a different attorney for Plaintiff, Evan J. Wynns, that no responses have been served.

Hearing is required to address the contradictory representations made by Plaintiff's various attorneys. Michael Arikat and Evan J. Wynns are both ordered to appear, either in person or via Zoom with video capabilities.=(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