DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25678504·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 2 months agoOFF CALENDAR. Insufficient notice per CCP 1005(b) and 1010.6.

CRYSTAL R. FLORIDA VS. MICHAEL D. RAGO ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Set Aside And Vacate Defaults

Hearing date
Jun 24, 2026
Department
501
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffCRYSTAL R. FLORIDA
DefendantMICHAEL D. RAGO
DefendantDARIA DAVALLOU
DefendantMARC SUTTER

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD25678504 - June 24, 2026 Hearing date: June 24, 2026 Case number: CUD25678504 Case title: CRYSTAL R. FLORIDA VS. MICHAEL D. RAGO ET AL Case Number: | | CUD25678504 | Case Title: | | CRYSTAL R. FLORIDA VS. MICHAEL D. RAGO ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-06-24 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Set Aside And Vacate Defaults | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for June 24, 2026. Line 7.2.

DEFENDANT DARIA DAVALLOU, MARC SUTTER Notice Of Motion And Motion To Set Aside And Vacate Defaults is OFF CALENDAR. Insufficient notice per CCP 1005(b) and 1010.6.

This matter will be heard in department 505 by the Honorable Michelle Tong at 1:30 p.m. per the order of the presiding judge. =(505/MT)

Parties may appear in-person, or via Zoom Video Conference (Meeting ID: 160 4132 4666 Passcode: 872834).

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