Von Dehn v. Bonamici CA4/2
Defendant Leanna Bonamici appeals from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff Kathleen von Dehn, following a court trial on plaintiff’s claims for (1) open book account, (2) account stated, and (3) quantum meruit. Defendant, in pro per, contends that because the statute of limitations had run, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to decide the matter. Defendant also argues that, even if the action was not time-barred, there was insufficient evidence to support the judgment.
We reject defendant’s contentions on the ground the record is inadequate for purposes of determining whether defendant’s contentions have any merit. Defendant has not provided this court with a reporter’s transcript, settled statement, or agreed statement of the oral trial proceedings. We therefore affirm the judgment. Plaintiff has filed in this court a motion for sanctions against defendant on the ground defendant’s appeal is frivolous.
Comments on Von Dehn v. Bonamici CA4/2