DIANA ZUNIGA VS. CARMEN A. GONZALEZ ET AL
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Determine Value, And Send Buyout Notice
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24618593 - September 10, 2026 Hearing date: September 10, 2026 Case number: CGC24618593 Case title: DIANA ZUNIGA VS. CARMEN A. GONZALEZ ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24618593 | Case Title: | | DIANA ZUNIGA VS. CARMEN A. GONZALEZ ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-09-10 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Determine Value, And Send Buyout Notice; Memornadum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion To Determine Value, And Send Buyout Notice | Rulings: | | On the Real Property / Housing Motion calendar for September 10, 2026, line 5. Defendant's Motion to Determine Value and Send Buyout Notice.
Pursuant to July 30, 2026 an Appraisal was filed on July 30, 2026. Defendant to prepare a proposed order per CCP 874.316(e) and present it to the Court for execution at the hearing on September 10, 2026. The Court will serve the Order/Notice forthwith. =(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
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?”