DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25679281·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 3 months agoGRANTED

FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION VS. ROBERT SPOONER II

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Have Requests For Admission Deemed Admitted

Hearing date
May 22, 2026
Department
501
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Discovery rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffFREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION
DefendantROBERT SPOONER II

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25679281 - May 22, 2026 Hearing date: May 22, 2026 Case number: CUD25679281 Case title: FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION VS. ROBERT SPOONER II Case Number: | | CUD25679281 | Case Title: | | FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION VS. ROBERT SPOONER II | Court Date: | | 2026-05-22 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Have Requests For Admission Deemed Admitted | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for May 22, 2026. Line 4.

PLAINTIFF FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION Motion To Have Requests For Admission Deemed Admitted is GRANTED subject to Opposition, pursuant to C.C.P. 2033.280. Plaintiff has shown that Requests for Admission were served on Defendant, and Plaintiff states no timely responses have been received. =(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