DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24612227·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing about 1 year agoGRANTED. Paragraph 28 and Exhibits 6 and 7 are improper, irrelevant to an element of any alleged cause of action, and are hereby stricken.

HONG ZHENG ET AL VS. GLENN FAMA ET AL

Amended MOTION TO STRIKE Amended COMPLAINT

Hearing date
Jun 27, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Strike rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffHONG ZHENG
DefendantGLENN FAMA

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24612227 - June 27, 2025 Hearing date: June 27, 2025 Case number: CGC24612227 Case title: HONG ZHENG ET AL VS. GLENN FAMA ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24612227 | Case Title: | | HONG ZHENG ET AL VS. GLENN FAMA ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-06-27 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Amended MOTION TO STRIKE Amended COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion calendar for June 27, 2025, line 3.

Defendants' Amended Motion to Strike Amended Complaint is GRANTED. Paragraph 28 and Exhibits 6 and 7 are improper, irrelevant to an element of any alleged cause of action, and are hereby stricken. The fact that this information may be eventually used at trial as impeachment evidence does not make it a relevant or proper allegation in a Complaint. =(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 | |

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