CA Unpub Decisions

In this postdissolution proceeding, Christopher Jackson appeals in propria persona the family court's February 9, 2016 order granting Karen Roque Jackson's request for the appointment of an elisor to execute a quitclaim deed transferring to her the title of real property located in Chula Vista, California (the property). We affirm the order.

Plaintiff Anthony Malfatti appeals from a judgment entered after the trial court sustained a demurrer without leave to amend. Malfatti’s failure to provide this court with an adequate record precludes appellate review, so we dismiss the appeal.

Plaintiff Ronald Jerrell Inman appeals from an order striking his complaint against the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and Steven J. Bechtold, under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, the anti-SLAPP statute. Representing himself throughout these proceedings, plaintiff contends that the lower court erred in striking his complaint because the conduct it alleged did not constitute free speech and was not privileged under Civil Code section 47. We agree with defendants, however, that their disclosure of plaintiff’s mental health records in his underlying habeas corpus proceeding met the criteria for protection under section 425.16. Accordingly, we must affirm the order.

Desirae B. (mother) appeals from orders of the juvenile dependency court finding her three minor children adoptable and terminating her parental rights at the conclusion of a contested hearing on February 27, 2017, pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Mother contends the juvenile court erred in failing to apply the beneficial parent-child relationship exception to adoption and termination of her parental rights. We affirm the judgment.

Appellant Lonnie Y. appeals from the juvenile court’s order declaring him a ward of the court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 following the sustaining of a petition filed June 17, 2015 charging him with first degree residential burglary (Pen. Code, § 459, subd. (a)) and grand theft of personal property (id., § 487, subd. (a)). He contends that the juvenile court erred in denying his motion to dismiss under section 701.1 for insufficient evidence, that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the petition, and that the juvenile court erred in declaring him statutorily ineligible for deferred entry of judgment. We affirm.

Vivian B. and Devonte P. appeal orders terminating parental rights to their children, Arianna P. and A.P. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) They argue the juvenile court erred when it determined the beneficial parent-child relationship did not apply. Devonte contends reversal of the orders terminating parental rights is required because the Agency did not correctly inform the children's caregiver about the legal rights and responsibilities of guardianship. Vivian joins with this argument. We affirm the findings and orders.

Julia L. appeals an order under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 selecting adoption as the permanent plan for her daughters A.L. and Aurora L. (the children) and terminating her parental rights. She contends the court erred in finding there was not a beneficial parent-child relationship between her and the children within the meaning of section 366.26, subdivision (c)(1)(B)(i) that precluded termination of her parental rights. We affirm.

A 2008 judgment (judgment) awarded Darrell K. Harris $111,534 against his former landlords, Harvey and Mark Ottovich (collectively defendants). In 2016, defendants’ sister, Karen E. Rayl, moved to vacate the judgment based on extrinsic mistake and/or fraud. The trial court denied the motion.
Rayl appeals, contending the court erred by denying the motion to vacate. We affirm.

In these consolidated appeals, plaintiffs and appellants Suitberto Gimenez (Gimenez), and Tim Romero and Diana Romero (Romero) (collectively, plaintiffs) appeal judgments in favor of defendant and respondent Ford Motor Company (Ford) following the grant of defense motions for summary judgment.

This appeal stems from a contract dispute between plaintiff Fama Trading Co. and defendants Fiel LLC and its owner, Alice Gu. Defendants appeal from the portion of the judgment holding them liable for fraud by concealment and promissory fraud. They contend the evidence was insufficient to support the trial court’s finding that Gu knew and intentionally concealed the fact that Fiel had lost the financing source upon which Fama relied when it agreed to ship Fiel over $75,000 worth of custom-made shoes. We conclude substantial evidence supports the court’s finding. We affirm.

Cindy K. Hung (Cindy) was employed as an independent contractor with Tribal Technologies, Inc., a software company in San Mateo. She was found dead at her workplace on October 21, 2010, after an unwitnessed fall from a balcony onto a second story roof. The coroner ultimately ruled the death was accidental.
Cindy’s parents, appellants Li Ching Chu and Robert Ching Liang Hung (plaintiffs), believe their daughter was murdered by two employees of Tribal Technologies, defendants and respondents Joseph Vierra (Cindy’s supervisor) and Victoria Dinovich. Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit, alleging numerous causes of action against multiple defendants based on Cindy’s alleged murder and a conspiracy to cover up the crime. Most of the defendants obtained judgments of dismissal at the pleading stage.

Cindy K. Hung (Cindy) was employed as an independent contractor with defendant and respondent Tribal Technologies, Inc. (Tribal Technologies), a software company in San Mateo. She was found dead at her workplace on October 21, 2010. The coroner ultimately ruled the death was accidental, having been caused by an unwitnessed jump or fall from a great height to a second story roof.
Cindy’s parents, appellants Li Ching Chu and Robert Ching Liang Hung (plaintiffs), believe their daughter was murdered by two employees of Tribal Technologies, Joseph Vierra (Cindy’s supervisor) and Victoria Dinovich. Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit, alleging numerous causes of action against multiple defendants based on Cindy’s alleged murder and a conspiracy to cover up the crime. Most of the defendants obtained judgments of dismissal at the pleading stage.

Plaintiff Raul Arellano is a prisoner currently housed by the defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (Department) at the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego County. In this personal injury action Arellano sued the Department for injuries he sustained when he suffered a seizure and fell from an upper bunk at the prison. Arellano alleges the Department is responsible for the negligence of certain employees who knew or should have known that Arellano had a seizure disorder which made it unreasonably dangerous to assign him to an upper bunk. He further claims that he provided the prison officer responsible for bunk assignments with a "medical chrono" form signed by a prison doctor specifying a bottom bunk assignment, but that this was ignored because it could not be confirmed in a computer database.

Plaintiff Parvaneh Solaymanpour, in propria persona, appeals from the entry of judgment against her following a bench trial. She argues that the trial court erred in granting her former counsel’s request to withdraw prior to trial and subsequently allowing plaintiff only a limited trial continuance. Plaintiff contends these errors prevented her from securing another attorney and left her unable to properly present her claims at trial. We find no error and affirm the judgment.