DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC25631748·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing 3 months agoTentative ruling to be posted-PLS CHECK BACK AT 3PM

KAREN MOY VS. MILESTONE FINANCIAL, LLC ET AL

Motion To Expunge Lis Pendens And To Recover Attorneys Fees In The Amount Of $10,420

Hearing date
May 29, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$10,420

Parties

PlaintiffKAREN MOY
DefendantMILESTONE FINANCIAL, LLC DBA MERS HOLDING LTD

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Real Property / Housing Dept 501 - CGC25631748 - May 29, 2026 Hearing date: May 29, 2026 Case number: CGC25631748 Case title: KAREN MOY VS. MILESTONE FINANCIAL, LLC ET AL Case Number: | | CGC25631748 | Case Title: | | KAREN MOY VS. MILESTONE FINANCIAL, LLC ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-05-29 09:30 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Motion To Expunge Lis Pendens And To Recover Attorneys Fees In The Amount Of $10,420 | Rulings: | | Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for May 29, 2026. Line 7. DEFENDANT MILESTONE FINANCIAL, LLC DBA MERS HOLDING LTD Motion To Expunge Lis Pendens And To Recover Attorneys Fees In The Amount Of $10,420 Tentative ruling to be posted-PLS CHECK BACK AT 3PM =(501/DWH)

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