Longhenry v. Pete Hill Construction Co.
Filed 11/4/13 Longhenry v. Pete Hill Construction Co. CA4/1
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts
and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or
ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
COURT
OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
ONE
STATE
OF CALIFORNIA
MICHAEL LONGHENRY,
Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
PETE HILL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,
INC.,
Defendant and Respondent.
D061535
(Super. Ct.
No.
37-2009-00086807-CU-PO-CTL)
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of
County, Ronald S. Prager, Judge. Affirmed.
Michael
Longhenry, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Grimm,
Vranjes & Greer, Eugene P. Kenny and Ryan R. Fick for Defendant and
Respondent.
In this
negligence action, plaintiff Michael Longhenry appeals a judgment entered after
a jury verdict in favor of defendant Pete Hill Construction Company, Inc.
(Hill). Longhenry contends the trial
court erred by: granting his attorney's request to be relieved on the eve of
trial; denying his new counsel's request to reopen discovery; granting Hill's
motions in limine; and denying Longhenry's request to make a "mini opening
statement" accompanied by presentation of demonstrative evidence.
"On
appeal, we must presume the trial court's judgment is correct. (See Denham
v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564 . . . .) In service of that rule, we adopt all
intendments and inferences to affirm the judgment or order unless the record
expressly contradicts them. (See
583 . . . .)" (
318, 324.) "It is an appellant's
duty to present a record from which the appellate court can determine whether
there has been error; failure to do so results in affirmance." (Niederer
v. Ferreira (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d
1485, 1509.)
"[A]n
appellant must not only present an analysis of the facts and legal authority on
each point made, but must also support arguments with appropriate citations to
the material facts in the record. If he
fails to do so, the argument is forfeited.
(Duarte v. Chino Community
Hospital (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 849, 856 . . . .)" (Nielsen
v. Gibson, supra, 178 Cal.App.4th at p. 324.) " 'This court is not required to
discuss or consider points which are not . . . supported by citation
to authorities or the record.' "
(Kim v. Sumitomo Bank (1993)
17 Cal.App.4th 974, 979.)
Longhenry's
designated record on appeal does not include a reporter's transcript or a
complete clerk's transcript.
name="_ftnref1" title="">[1] His briefs rely on facts unsupported by
citations to the record. In his reply
brief, Longhenry suggests that Hill, or this court, should procure a reporter's
transcript. "The ordinary civil
litigant is not entitled to free transcripts on appeal at public expense."
(Leslie
v. Roe (1974) 41 Cal.App.3d 104, 107.)
"[W]e will not take it upon ourselves to fulfill [Longhenry's]
responsibilities."
Cal.App.4th 492, 499, fn. omitted.) The
record before us shows no error; accordingly, we affirm the judgment.
DISPOSITION
The
judgment is affirmed.
McDONALD, Acting P. J.
WE CONCUR:
O'ROURKE, J.
AARON, J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1] The clerk's transcript includes only three documents
directly bearing on Longhenry's contentions:
his trial brief regarding the use of demonstratives in opening statements
and two motions in limine by Hill. The
clerk's transcript does not include the motion to be relieved, the motion to
reopen discovery or opposition to those motions; opposition to the motions in
limine; opposition to the request to make a "mini opening statement";
or a complete record of the court's reasoning in ruling on any of the motions.
