DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD25677929·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 5 months agoDENIED

MIN LING ZHANG VS. ELISEO ORTEGON ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Enforce Agreement

Hearing date
Apr 2, 2026
Department
501
Judge
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffMIN LING ZHANG
DefendantELISEO ORTEGON

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for April 2, 2026. Line 5. PLAINTIFF MIN ZHANG Notice Of Motion And Motion To Enforce Agreement is DENIED without prejudice.

No competent evidence that the Stipulation is still in effect, that Defendant breached, or that Defendant is still in possession. The declaration of Plaintiff, which is dated January 6, 2025, is not competent to attest to facts and circumstances purportedly occurring several months after this date. Additionally, there is no foundation in the declaration of Plaintiff's counsel for the statements that Defendant failed to make payments or that Defendant is still in possession of the premises. The Court also notes that the proof of electronic service of the moving papers on Defendant's counsel does not comply with CCP 1013b(b).=(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 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