DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC25631212·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing 3 months agoCONTINUED

SAN FRANCISCO TENANTS UNION ET AL VS. SMARTRENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ET AL

MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

Hearing date
May 28, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jun 18, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSAN FRANCISCO TENANTS UNION
DefendantSMARTRENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
DefendantEQUITY RESIDENTIAL
DefendantERP OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
DefendantEQUITY RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT LLC
DefendantEQUITY-TASMAN APARTMENTS LLC
DefendantARCHSTONE DAGGETT PLACE LLC
DefendantARCHSTONE SOUTH MARKET LP
DefendantEQR-TERRACES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for May 28, 2026. Line 3. DEFENDANT EQUITY RESIDENTIAL, A REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST, ERP OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, EQUITY RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT LLC, EQUITY-TASMAN APARTMENTS LLC, ARCHSTONE DAGGETT PLACE LLC, ARCHSTONE SOUTH MARKET LP, EQR-TERRACES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION is CONTINUED to June 18, 2026 on the Court's own motion. =(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 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