DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25678345·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 12 months agoGRANTED, subject to opposition.

CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC. VS. LANG GUET KHOV ET AL

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Hearing date
Aug 20, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Summary Judgment rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffCHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC.
DefendantLANG GUET KHOV

Attorneys

Dylan K. Y. Youngfor Plaintiff

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25678345 - August 20, 2025 Hearing date: August 20, 2025 Case number: CUD25678345 Case title: CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC. VS. LANG GUET KHOV ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25678345 | Case Title: | | CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC. VS. LANG GUET KHOV ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-08-20 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT / Notice Of Motion And Notice For Summary Judgment; Declaration Of Dylan K.

Y. Young | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Motion calendar for August 20, 2025, line 4. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, subject to opposition. =(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 tent ative 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