DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25677985·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing about 1 year agoOFF CALENDAR. Insufficient notice per Order Shortening Time.

EQUITY RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT, LLC VS. DIONIA JACKSON ET AL

Motion to Vacate Default and Judgment

Hearing date
Jun 17, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffEQUITY RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT, LLC
DefendantDIONIA JACKSON
DefendantHAROLD SCOTT

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25677985 - June 17, 2025 Hearing date: June 17, 2025 Case number: CUD25677985 Case title: EQUITY RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT, LLC VS. DIONIA JACKSON ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25677985 | Case Title: | | EQUITY RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT, LLC VS. DIONIA JACKSON ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-06-17 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion, Motion, Memorandum Of Points And Authorities And Declaration In Support Of Motion To Vacate Default And Judgment | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion calendar for June 17, 2025, line 8.

Defendant Harold Scott's Motion to Vacate Default and Judgment is OFF CALENDAR. Insufficient notice per Order Shortening Time. =(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