DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24615645·sf·Civil·Breach of Contract
Hearing 4 months agoDENIED

JIA CHEN ET AL VS. CE-GH URBANITE FUND 2, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED ET AL

MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION / Notice Of Motion And Motion For Summary Adjudication Of The First Cause Of Action For Breach Of Contract

Hearing date
Apr 14, 2026
Department
501
Judge
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Summary Adjudication rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Monetary amounts referenced

$7,791,164.55

Parties

PlaintiffJia Chen
PlaintiffWenji Chen
PlaintiffXuan Chen
PlaintiffShouchun Hong
PlaintiffLiang Kong
PlaintiffLyu Meng
PlaintiffPacific Sun Resources Inc
PlaintiffLixin Qiu
PlaintiffJie Shen
PlaintiffHuaqing Sun
PlaintiffZhongwei Zhu
DefendantCE-GH Urbanite Fund 2, LLC

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for April 14, 2026. Line 4. PLAINTIFF JIA CHEN, AN INDIVIDUAL, WENJI CHEN, XUAN CHEN, SHOUCHUN HONG, LIANG KONG, LYU MENG, PACIFIC SUN RESOURCES INC, A BVI BUSINESS COMPANY, LIXIN QIU, JIE SHEN, HUAQING SUN, ZHONGWEI ZHU MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION / Notice Of Motion And Motion For Summary Adjudication Of The First Cause Of Action For Breach Of Contract is DENIED.

Moving party failed to shift their burden and establish that CE-GH's non-payment of interest and principal damaged Plaintiffs in the amount of $7,791,164.55 (Fact 20). No competent evidence provided as to the calculation of interest. Objection number 4 to Paragraph 17 of Petrozziello Declaration is SUSTAINED. Furthermore, Plaintiffs disputed/denied Defendant's Additional fact number 7.

The Court does not reach the issue raised in the supplemental briefing. The Court notes that opposition to the motion for summary judgment is not a proper mechanism to address discovery issues such as mistaken/incorrect/wrong/caused by lack of notice/caused by misunderstanding responses to requests for admissions. Discovery is governed by the Discovery Act and must be addressed under this Act. Defendant's objections to Petrozziello Declaration (except for objection number 4) are overruled. =(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