Scott James

Ike's popularity swells

Yet another branch of San Francisco government has set its sights on putting popular sandwich shop Ike’s Place out of business.

The sheriff’s office has given Ike’s until Wednesday, August 25 at 6:01 a.m. to “vacate the premises,” according to owner Ike Shehadeh.

The official eviction notice was delivered yesterday, despite a court hearing on the matter scheduled for Tuesday, August 24 at 9:30 a.m. If Ike’s loses in court that day, the eatery will have less than 24 hours to leave.

It’s just the latest move against the restaurant that has become a foodie phenomenon in recent years. Four upstairs neighbors have complained about the crowds, noise and smells ever since the eatery became a success. At one point two of the neighbors asked for $800,000 from Ike’s to look the other way. When that didn’t work, they sued.

Even though Ike’s Place has operated since 2007, the city’s Planning Department recently claimed that the restaurant needs a different permit to operate – one the city knows can’t be obtained. Since the shop can’t comply, it is paying the city a fine of $250 per day.

On top of all that, the building’s landlord, Denman S. Drobisch, has made several attempts to evict Ike’s.

That’s what the court date is about on Tuesday, but eviction is not a done deal. Expect to hear an argument that Ike’s has been the victim of some legal foul play.

It’s complicated, and you might need to cram some episodes of Law & Order to decipher this, but here goes:

Local legal experts explained that eviction proceedings can move very quickly, but in exchange for that haste plaintiffs are required to strictly adhere to every detail. Failure to do so means a case is no longer granted a fast track through the courts.

Cases are typically only given one chance at a quick ruling, known as a summary judgment. On June 29, as reported by The Bay Citizen, summary judgment was denied in the eviction case against Ike’s Place.

So it raised a red flag on Friday, August 6, when a newspaper reported that a summary judgment was granted in the case. A second summary judgment? That’s not supposed to be possible.

Even more curious was the fact that no one from Ike’s Place was in court for the hearing, which should have raised suspicions about the validity of the action. Experts say the court should have known, based on previous proceedings, that Ike’s has legal representation.

A staff member for San Francisco Superior Court Judge Peter Busch, who made the ruling, seemed confused when asked how it was possible for the plaintiff to ask for summary judgment twice.

Later, when pressed for clarification, court spokesman John Ellis said, “Whether we did something proper or improper is not something we can comment on.”

But Judge Busch is expected to comment on Tuesday. What he says will determine if Ike’s Place stays or goes. If the judge orders the eviction, there could be a showdown at 6:01 a.m. Wednesday morning.

“If they’re going to evict us, it’s going to be with the sheriff on TV,” said Shehadeh.