DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25677744·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing about 1 year agoGRANTED

SF MULTIFAMILY POOLS 2-3 (B) OWNER LLC VS. LAWRENCE THOMAS ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Order To Substitute Plaintiff

Hearing date
Jun 30, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSF MULTIFAMILY POOLS 2-3 (B) OWNER LLC
DefendantLAWRENCE THOMAS
PlaintiffMHD Real Estate LLC

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25677744 - June 30, 2025 Hearing date: June 30, 2025 Case number: CUD25677744 Case title: SF MULTIFAMILY POOLS 2-3 (B) OWNER LLC VS. LAWRENCE THOMAS ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25677744 | Case Title: | | SF MULTIFAMILY POOLS 2-3 (B) OWNER LLC VS. LAWRENCE THOMAS ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-06-30 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Order To Substitute Plaintiff | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion calendar for June 30, 2025, line 5.

Plaintiff's Motion for Order to Substitute Plaintiff is GRANTED. No opposition filed. MHD Real Estate LLC is substituted as the plaintiff in this action. =(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