DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25678830·sf·Civil·Unlawful Detainer
Hearing 12 months agoDefendant's Motion to Set Aside Default, Vacate Default Judgment and Recall Writ of Execution is off calendar at the request of the moving party.

1066 MARKET LLC VS. SONJA GRIFFIN ET AL

MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT/DEFAULT JUDGMENT/LEAVE TO DEFEND

Hearing date
Sep 2, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

Plaintiff1066 MARKET LLC
DefendantSONJA GRIFFIN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25678830 - September 2, 2025 Hearing date: September 2, 2025 Case number: CUD25678830 Case title: 1066 MARKET LLC VS. SONJA GRIFFIN ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25678830 | Case Title: | | 1066 MARKET LLC VS. SONJA GRIFFIN ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-09-02 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT/DEFAULT JUDGMENT/LEAVE TO DEFEND | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Motion calendar for September 2, 2025, line 6. Defendant's Motion to Set Aside Default, Vacate Default Judgment and Recall Writ of Execution is off calendar at the request of the moving party. =(501/SKF) 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