DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD26682107·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing todayOFF CALENDAR. No valid proof of service on file. It also appears, based on the date of the filing, there is insufficient notice under CCP 1005.

SWORDS TO PLOWSHARES, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT VS. DONALD GILLSON ET AL

Motion Re E-Service Consent / Crc 2.251 Ccp 128, 1010.6

Hearing date
Sep 9, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSWORDS TO PLOWSHARES, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT
DefendantDONALD GILLSON

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD26682107 - September 9, 2026 Hearing date: September 9, 2026 Case number: CUD26682107 Case title: SWORDS TO PLOWSHARES, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT VS. DONALD GILLSON ET AL Case Number: | | CUD26682107 | Case Title: | | SWORDS TO PLOWSHARES, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT VS. DONALD GILLSON ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-09-09 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Motion Re E-Service Consent / Crc 2.251 Ccp 128, 1010.6 | Rulings: | | On the Real Property / Housing Motion calendar for September 9, 2026, line 11.

Defendant's Motion Re: E-Service Consent/CRC 2.251, CCP 128, 1010.6 is OFF CALENDAR. No valid proof of service on file. It also appears, based on the date of the filing, there is insufficient notice under CCP 1005. =(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