DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD26681644·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing todayCONTINUED

AMORE REAL ESTATE, INC. VS. LEE DEBROFF ET AL

Notice Of Motion To Compel Further Responses To Interrogatories And Requests For Production Of Documents And For Monetary Sanctions

Hearing date
Sep 10, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Sep 16, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffAMORE REAL ESTATE, INC.
DefendantLEE DEBROFF

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD26681644 - September 10, 2026 Hearing date: September 10, 2026 Case number: CUD26681644 Case title: AMORE REAL ESTATE, INC. VS. LEE DEBROFF ET AL Case Number: | | CUD26681644 | Case Title: | | AMORE REAL ESTATE, INC. VS. LEE DEBROFF ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-09-10 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion To Compel Further Responses To Interrogatories And Requests For Production Of Documents And For Monetary Sanctions | Rulings: | | On the Real Property / Housing Motion calendar for September 10, 2026, line 9.

Defendant's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents and for Monetary Sanctions is continued to September 16, 2026 to be heard by the Honorable Michelle Tong. The trial date is continued to September 21, 2026. =(501/MT)

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