DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC18571386·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing about 1 year agoDefendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint is transferred to Department 302 to be heard on July 10, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. per the Order of the Presiding Judge.

CHARLES LI VS. MEI LING FANG ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Dismiss Complaint [Ccp Section 581(F)(4)]

Hearing date
Jul 10, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jul 10, 2025

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffCHARLES LI
DefendantMEI LING FANG

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC18571386 - July 10, 2025 Hearing date: July 10, 2025 Case number: CGC18571386 Case title: CHARLES LI VS. MEI LING FANG ET AL Case Number: | | CGC18571386 | Case Title: | | CHARLES LI VS. MEI LING FANG ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-07-10 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Dismiss Complaint [Ccp Section 581(F)(4)] | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion calendar for July 10, 2025, line 1.

Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Complaint is transferred to Department 302 to be heard on July 10, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. per the Order of the Presiding Judge. CCP 170.6 challenge on file to the Honorable Charles F. Haines. =(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