DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CPF18516313·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 11 months agoOFF CALENDAR. Insufficient notice per CCP 1005(b).

931 SANCHEZ STREET LLC VS. LEGACY UNITED CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, INC. ET AL

Application And Declaration Of Attorney For Order Of Sale Of Dwelling

Hearing date
Sep 16, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

Plaintiff931 SANCHEZ STREET LLC
DefendantLEGACY UNITED CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, INC.

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CPF18516313 - September 16, 2025 Hearing date: September 16, 2025 Case number: CPF18516313 Case title: 931 SANCHEZ STREET LLC VS. LEGACY UNITED CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, INC. ET AL Case Number: | | CPF18516313 | Case Title: | | 931 SANCHEZ STREET LLC VS. LEGACY UNITED CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, INC. ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-09-16 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Application And Declaration Of Attorney For Order Of Sale Of Dwelling | Rulings: | | On the Real Property/Housing Court motion calendar for September 16, 2025, line 1.

Petitioner's Application for Order of Sale of Dwelling is OFF CALENDAR. Insufficient notice per CCP 1005(b). =(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. | |

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