Stonestown Galleria files unlawful detainer suit against Blondie's Pizza over $74,000

Stonestown Galleria filed an eviction suit on Jan. 27 seeking to remove Blondie’s Pizza from its food court, alleging the Bay Area chain owes more than $74,000 in unpaid rent. The complaint, as reported, says the mall issued a default notice and then a pay-or-vacate demand that gave Blondie’s 15 days to clear the balance before facing eviction.

Blondie’s Stonestown location opened in 2022 under a 10-year lease and remains in operation. “Blondie’s remains open,” the San Francisco Standard reported, and Hoodline noted that “Blondie’s still lists its Stonestown shop on the Blondie’s Pizza website, and the location continues to show up on delivery apps.” Hoodline added, “For now, it looks like business as usual at the counter.”

The suit is described in reports as an unlawful-detainer action. The mall filed the complaint in its corporate name, and reporting identifies Brookfield Properties as the mall owner and landlord. A spokesperson for Stonestown Galleria declined to comment on the lawsuit. Blondie’s current owner, Abdul Zaloukh, who purchased the chain in 2016, did not respond to a request for comment, the Standard said.

Blondie’s traces its history to 1980, when Berkeley entrepreneur Ken Sarachan founded the brand and popularized 20-inch pies. The chain expanded to three locations and has been called a “45-year-old Bay Area chain” in local reporting. The Standard also recounted past trouble for the brand: a Powell Street shop faced a temporary health shutdown over a cockroach infestation in 2016 and later closed that year.

The dispute comes as Stonestown pursues a broader reinvention. Reporting cited in coverage frames the mall as evolving into a foodie destination with newcomers such as Le Soleil and longstanding spots like Tang Bar, alongside recent retail openings including Designer Shoe Warehouse, Jins, and H&M. An AI-assisted writeup framed the moment in blunt terms, saying “the mall’s owner is trying to kick the local favorite to the curb,” and suggested that “Mall workers and regulars are now left to wonder whether this ends with a quiet payoff, a negotiated exit, or a full-on courtroom scrap.”

For San Francisco residents, the case matters for several reasons: it affects a familiar food-court vendor that draws students and shoppers, it highlights the pressure on small operators in malls undergoing redevelopment, and it could signal how the city’s retail landscape shifts as property owners reposition assets. Key facts remain unreported publicly: the filed complaint itself, any court case number or hearing dates, and a detailed accounting of the alleged $74,000 debt.

Watch for filings in the county court clerk’s records and any statements from Brookfield Properties or Blondie’s owner for confirmation of the lawsuit’s specifics. In the short term, Stonestown shoppers can still buy slices at the counter; over the medium term, the outcome may influence other food-court leases and Stonestown’s tenant mix as redevelopment plans advance.