Eury v. Aboutaleb
Defendant and appellant Ahmed Aboutaleb appeals from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff and respondent Saleto T. Eury in this breach of contract action.[1] Ahmed contends: 1) the judgment against him is void for lack of valid service of process; and 2) the trial court abused its discretion by denying Ahmed's requests for continuances and imposing sanctions. We conclude substantial evidence supports the trial court's finding that Ahmed was properly served with the summons and complaint. Ahmed has failed to provide an adequate record on appeal to permit review of the trial court's discretionary rulings on his requests for continuances and sanctions. Therefore, we affirm.
Comments on Eury v. Aboutaleb