MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Pursuant To Ccp 437c
SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 301 - CGC24618825 - September 10, 2025 Hearing date: September 10, 2025 Case number: CGC24618825 Case title: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. VS. CHANGBIN YU Case Number: | | CGC24618825 | Case Title: | | WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. VS. CHANGBIN YU | Court Date: | | 2025-09-10 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Pursuant To Ccp 437c | Rulings: | | Matter on the Law & Motion/Discovery Calendar for Wednesday, September 10, 2025, line 8, PLAINTIFF WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Pursuant To Ccp 437c
Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank N.A.'s unopposed motion for summary judgment is granted.
A party may move for summary adjudication in an action or proceeding if it is contended that the cause of action has no merit. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 437c(a)(1).) The motion for summary adjudication shall be granted if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact. (Id., sec. 437c(c).) The moving party must make an initial showing, based upon affirmative evidence, that summary adjudication must be granted. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Company (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.)
If the movant meets this initial burden, the burden then shifts to the opposing party to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists. The court liberally construes the evidence in support of the party opposing summary adjudication and resolves doubts concerning the evidence in favor of that party. (Hughes v. Pair (2009) 46 Cal.4th 1035, 1039.) The moving party bears the burden of persuasion "from the commencement to conclusion" to show "that there is no triable issue of material fact and that [it] is entitled to [summary adjudication] as a matter of law." (Ibid.)
Here, Wells Fargo has produced evidence sufficient to show it is entitled to judgment on its breach of contract cause of action and its common counts / money lent cause of action. Defendant Changbin Yu presents no evidence to rebut or undermine its showing. Summary judgment is therefore granted. Wells Fargo may submit its proposed judgment, previously lodged with the court, for endorsement.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing. Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept301tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. = (302/CVA) | |