DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC19573861·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 2 months agoSUSTAINED with leave to amend

LINDA S CATRON VS. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC. ET AL

DEMURRER to COMPLAINT

Hearing date
Jun 24, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffLINDA S CATRON
DefendantNATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC
DefendantU.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC19573861 - June 24, 2026 Hearing date: June 24, 2026 Case number: CGC19573861 Case title: LINDA S CATRON VS. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC. ET AL Case Number: | | CGC19573861 | Case Title: | | LINDA S CATRON VS. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC. ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-06-24 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | DEMURRER to COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for June 24, 2026. Line 1.1.

DEFENDANT NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE, DEMURRER to COMPLAINT is sustained with leave to amend. Plaintiff shall have 10 days to file an amended complaint addressing in good faith all issues raised by the demurrer. No opposition filed. =(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 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