Wells Fargo Bank v. Terry

 

 

 

Filed 1/21/14  Wells Fargo
Bank v. Terry CA2/2

 

 

 

 

 

>NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE
OFFICIAL REPORTS

 

 

 

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  This opinion has not been
certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

 

 

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

 

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

 

DIVISION TWO

 

 
>

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,               Plaintiff and Respondent,               v.   BRIAN TERRY et al.,               Defendants and Appellants.

B243944         (href="http://www.sandiegohealthdirectory.com/">Los Angeles County       Super. Ct. No. TC026191)

 

 

 

            APPEAL
from a judgment of the Superior Court of
Los Angeles County,  William P. Barry,
Judge.  Affirmed.

 

            Brian
Terry, in pro. per., for Defendants and Appellants.

 

            Law
Offices of Glenn H. Wechsler, Glenn H. Wechsler and Jeffrey D. Kirk for
Plaintiff and Respondent.

 

_________________________

 

 

            Defendant and appellant Brian Terry
(Terry), who is in propria persona, appeals
from the default judgment entered in favor of plaintiff and respondent Wells
Fargo Bank, N.A. (Wells Fargo).href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">^[1]  We affirm on the ground that Terry has failed
to meet his burden on appeal to affirmatively show trial court error.

“‘A judgment or
order of the lower court is href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">presumed correct.  All intendments and presumptions are indulged
to support it on matters as to which the record is silent, and error must be
affirmatively shown.  This is not only a
general principle of appellate practice but an ingredient of the href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">constitutional doctrine of reversible error.’”  (Denham
v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564; Hernandez v. California Hospital Medical Center (2000) 78
Cal.App.4th 498, 502.) 

Rule 8.204(a)(1)(C) of the
California Rules of Court requires all appellate briefs to “[s]upport any
reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number
of the record where the matter appears.”  It is well-established that “‘[i]f a party
fails to support an argument with the necessary citations to the record, . . .
the argument [will be] deemed to have been waived.  [Citation.]’” 
(Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
122 Cal.App.4th 1229, 1246.)  The opening
brief contains only a single citation to the record.  Because Terry has failed to provide the
necessary citations to support his arguments, we deem his arguments to be forfeited.

            Additionally,
California Rules
of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(B), requires that each point in an appellate
brief be supported by argument and, if possible, by citation of authority.  Although Terry does provide some citations to
legal authorities, mostly federal law, he fails to apply the cited law to the
facts of this case in any coherent manner. 
Terry’s arguments, which essentially accuse the href="http://www.mcmillanlaw.us/">trial court and Wells Fargo’s counsel of
improper behavior, are largely unintelligible and fail to affirmatively demonstrate
that the trial court erred.  “When an issue is
unsupported by pertinent or cognizable legal argument it may be deemed
abandoned and discussion by the reviewing court is unnecessary.”  (Landry
v. Berryessa Union School Dist. (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 691, 699–700.)  Accordingly, as a consequence of Terry’s
failure to properly present his arguments on appeal, we deem his contentions to
be forfeited, and do not address them.  (>Evans v. Centerstone Development Co. (2005)
134 Cal.App.4th 151, 165.)

The
fact that a party has been representing itself does not exempt it from these
mandatory appellate requirements. 
Litigants appearing in propria persona are not entitled to special
exemptions from the California Rules of Court or Code of Civil Procedure and
are held to the same standards as a litigant represented by counsel.  (Gamet v.
Blanchard (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1276, 1284; Nwosu v. Uba, supra, 122 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1246–1247.)

DISPOSITION

            The judgment is affirmed.  Wells Fargo is entitled to recover its costs
on appeal.

            NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.

 

 

 

                                                                        ______________________________,
J.

                                                                                    ASHMANN-GERST

 

We concur:

 

 

_______________________________,
P. J.

                        BOREN

 

 

_______________________________, J.href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="">^*

                        FERNS