DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC25631136·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing 4 months agoSUSTAINED with leave to amend

BOUDIN HOLDINGS, INC VS. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ET AL

DEMURRER to COMPLAINT

Hearing date
Apr 24, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffBOUDIN HOLDINGS, INC
DefendantCITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
DefendantSAN FRANCISCO ASSESSOR-RECORDER
DefendantSAN FRANCISCO CONTROLLER
DefendantSAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
DefendantSAN FRANCISCO TREASURER
DefendantSAN FRANCISCO TAX COLLECTOR

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for April 24, 2026. Line 5. DEFENDANT CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO SAN FRANCISCO ASSESSOR-RECORDER, SAN FRANCISCO CONTROLLER, SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SAN FRANCISCO TREASURER, SAN FRANCISCO TAX COLLECTOR DEMURRER to COMPLAINT is SUSTAINED with leave to amend to allege a viable claim. The theories for recovery currently alleged in the complaint are not supported by any legal authorities on point. (See opposition to the demurrer). =(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