DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD26681255·sf·Civil·Real Property/Housing
Hearing 4 months agoSUSTAINED with leave to amend to allege facts in support of each element of each affirmative defense.

THE JOHN STEWART COMPANY VS. ELLIOT HOLLINGSWORTH ET AL

DEMURRER to Amended ANSWER to COMPLAINT

Hearing date
Apr 17, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffTHE JOHN STEWART COMPANY
DefendantELLIOT HOLLINGSWORTH

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CUD26681255 - April 17, 2026 Hearing date: April 17, 2026 Case number: CUD26681255 Case title: THE JOHN STEWART COMPANY VS. ELLIOT HOLLINGSWORTH ET AL Case Number: | | CUD26681255 | Case Title: | | THE JOHN STEWART COMPANY VS. ELLIOT HOLLINGSWORTH ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-04-17 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | DEMURRER to Amended ANSWER to COMPLAINT | Rulings: | | On the Real Property/Housing Motion calendar for April 17, 2026, line 14. Plaintiff's Demurrer to Amended Answer to Complaint is SUSTAINED with leave to amend to allege facts in support of each element of each affirmative defense. =(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