DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25677821·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing about 1 year agoGRANTED

735 TAYLOR I1, LP VS. DESTINY PATTERSON ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Order That The Truth Of Matters Be Deemed Admitted

Hearing date
Jun 5, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

Plaintiff735 TAYLOR I1, LP
DefendantDESTINY PATTERSON

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for June 5, 2025 line 9. PLAINTIFF 735 TAYLOR I1, LP NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER THAT THE TRUTH OF MATTERS BE DEEMED ADMITTED is GRANTED, subject to any opposition that may be made. Truth of all matters in Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions, Set One to Defendant Destiny Patterson, served on April 22, 2025, are deemed admitted. Absent any opposition, the moving papers establish entitlement to the relief sought by the motion. =(501/HEK) 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