DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24620852·sf·Civil·Partition of Real Property
Hearing 4 months agoDENIED without prejudice.

MARTHA SHEN-URQUIDEZ ET AL VS. LOUISA HU ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Appoint Broker And Referee Pursuant To Partition Of Real Property Act

Hearing date
Apr 21, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffMARTHA SHEN-URQUIDEZ
DefendantLOUISA HU

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC24620852 - April 21, 2026 Hearing date: April 21, 2026 Case number: CGC24620852 Case title: MARTHA SHEN-URQUIDEZ ET AL VS. LOUISA HU ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24620852 | Case Title: | | MARTHA SHEN-URQUIDEZ ET AL VS. LOUISA HU ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-04-21 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Appoint Broker And Referee Pursuant To Partition Of Real Property Act | Rulings: | | On the Real Property/Housing Motion calendar for April 21, 2026, line 4.

Defendant's Motion to Appoint Broker and Referee pursuant to Partition of Real property Act is DENIED without prejudice. =(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