Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

If you own the house that is the subject of the first case, then unless it has already been foreclosed, you could not be evicted. So I have to assume you do not own the home. You have not provided any written douments showing any type of defense you have to the first . I do not see how the two cases are related. You can send to the judge a short note saying you request the two cases be merged, but the judge is probably going to ignore it. See if you can get an attorney on a contigency basis to handle the cases, as I doubt you can handle them on your own.

That attorney that you claim you don't have sucks. He has a duty to file what is known as a "notice of related cases" and have them consolidated or coordinated if possible.

Too few facts, too little time. If an attorney needed to get a client's hearing postponed, he or she would first try to reach an agreement (a "stipulation") with the opposing attorney. If that didn't work, the attorney would make an ex-parte application for an order postponing the matter. Ex-parte applications are an opportunity to get the judge's ear for five or ten minutes to ask for a special dispensation of some kind. Ordinarily, the party desiring to appear ex parte must follow certain rules which include notifying all other parties at least 24 hours in advance so that they can appear to oppose you, if they wish, and must go into court with an application and a proposed order all prepared for the judge to sign. This is too demanding an exercise for most non-lawyer parties to handle, but it is not impossible.. Step One is to find out what days and times the particular judge is available to hear ex-parte matters. The next step is to prepare at least three documents: An application for an order with supporting facts and a memorandum of applicable law, usually two or three pages will suffice; a declaration that you have notified all other parties (about two pages) and a proposed order (also about two pages). The documents need to be on pleading paper and bear the case caption. There are other requirements.

In your case, I guess the lawyer who is NOT appearing 9/3 on your behalf represents you in the other case only, and not in the one involving the eviction hearing. By the way, when you write "eviction hearing," do you perhaps mean an unlawful detainer trial?

If you would privately e-mail me the names of the courts and the case numbers, I can do a little on-line research for you and maybe give you some further advice. No promises. Also indicate your role in each case (defendant, etc.).

Do you have an attorney or not. Your question makes no sense. It is full of contradictions. Bottom line: if you can't afford an attorney then you must be able to afford to lose the case.