DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25679197·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing about 1 year agoDefendant's Demurrer to Complaint is OVERRULED, 5 days to answer.

ERNEST U. MADU VS. SMITH C. AWAMBU

DEMURRER to COMPLAINT

Hearing date
Aug 1, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffERNEST U. MADU
DefendantSMITH C. AWAMBU

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25679197 - August 1, 2025 Hearing date: August 1, 2025 Case number: CUD25679197 Case title: ERNEST U. MADU VS. SMITH C. AWAMBU Case Number: | | CUD25679197 | Case Title: | | ERNEST U. MADU VS. SMITH C. AWAMBU | Court Date: | | 2025-08-01 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | DEMURRER to COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion calendar for August 1, 2025, line 11.

Defendant's Demurrer to Complaint is OVERRULED, 5 days to answer. There is no other action pending between the same parties on the same cause of action. The ambiguities in the Complaint which defendant complains of do not render the pleading so uncertain that defendant cannot reasonably respond. =(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