DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25680564·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 3 months agoTentative ruling to be posted-PLS CHECK BACK AT 3PM

JACK M LAPIDOS VS. CONYUS CALHOUN ET AL

Notice Of Motion, Motion, Memorandum Of Points And Authorities And Declaration In Support Of Motion To Vacate Default And Judgment

Hearing date
May 26, 2026
Department
501
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffJACK M LAPIDOS
DefendantCONYUS CALHOUN

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25680564 - May 26, 2026 Hearing date: May 26, 2026 Case number: CUD25680564 Case title: JACK M LAPIDOS VS. CONYUS CALHOUN ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25680564 | Case Title: | | JACK M LAPIDOS VS. CONYUS CALHOUN ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-05-26 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 May 26, 2026. Line 5. DEFENDANT CONYUS CALHOUN AN INDIVIDUAL Notice Of Motion, Motion, Memorandum Of Points And Authorities And Declaration In Support Of Motion To Vacate Default And Judgment Tentative ruling to be posted-PLS CHECK BACK AT 3PM =(501/DWH)

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 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