DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24618084·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing about 1 year agoGRANTED

MIREN R ALVAREZ VS. PROVIDENT FUNDING ASSOCIATES, L.P.. ET AL

Motion For Order Of Dismissal For Failure To Amend Complaint After Sustaining Of Demurrer

Hearing date
Jul 8, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffMIREN R ALVAREZ
DefendantPROVIDENT FUNDING ASSOCIATES, L.P.

Attorneys

Bradford E. Kleinfor Defendant

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24618084 - July 8, 2025 Hearing date: July 8, 2025 Case number: CGC24618084 Case title: MIREN R ALVAREZ VS. PROVIDENT FUNDING ASSOCIATES, L.P.. ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24618084 | Case Title: | | MIREN R ALVAREZ VS. PROVIDENT FUNDING ASSOCIATES, L.P.. ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-07-08 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Motion For Order Of Dismissal For Failure To Amend Complaint After Sustaining Of Demurrer; Memorandum Of Points And Authorities; Declaration Of Bradford E. Klein, Esq. In Support Thereof |

Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion calendar for July 8, 2025, line 2. Defendant's Motion for Dismissal for Failure to Amend Complaint After Sustaining of Demurrer is GRANTED pursuant to CCP section 581(f)(2). No opposition filed. =(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