| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reconsideration Of Order Granting Defendants' Motion To Expunge Lis Pendens
SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC25623983 - September 19, 2025 Hearing date: September 19, 2025 Case number: CGC25623983 Case title: KURT GRIMES VS. RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC ET AL Case Number: | | CGC25623983 | Case Title: | | KURT GRIMES VS. RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-09-19 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reconsideration Of Order Granting Defendants' Motion To Expunge Lis Pendens. Declaration Of Kurt Grimes, Memorandum Of Points And Authorities | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for Sept 19, 2025. Line 7.1.
PLAINTIFF KURT GRIMES Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reconsideration Of Order Granting Defendants' Motion To Expunge Lis Pendens. Declaration Of Kurt Grimes, Memorandum Of Points And Authorities is OFF CALENDAR. Insufficient notice per CCP 1005(b) and 1010.6. =(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 so notified, and the opposing party does not appear. | |
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”