Jeffries v. Smith CA2/5

Filed 10/28/24 Jeffries v. Smith CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

ESSIE JEFFRIES, B330747

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. 21STCV04800)

BARBARA ANN SMITH,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Armen Tamzarian, Judge. Affirmed. Essie Jeffries, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Stapleton & Stapleton and Victoria P. Stapleton for Defendant and Respondent.

Plaintiff Essie Jeffries (plaintiff) appeals from a judgment following a bench trial on her complaint against Barbara Ann Smith (Smith) and the Estate of Annie B. Dillard (collectively, defendants). Plaintiff’s primary contention of error is that the trial court abused its discretion by denying her request to continue the trial. We consider whether the record on appeal, which is sparse, is adequate to allow us to determine whether plaintiff has overcome the presumption of correctness that attaches to the trial court’s order.

I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed her original complaint on February 8, 2021, and an amended complaint in September of the same year.1 A bench trial was originally scheduled for November 2, 2022. Less than two weeks before that date, plaintiff filed an ex parte application for an order continuing the trial and reopening discovery. Smith opposed the ex parte application. Though the case register in the appellate record indicates the trial court denied plaintiff’s application, trial was rescheduled on the court’s own motion to January 4, 2023. The court held the bench trial on the rescheduled date. The minute order reflects the parties announced ready for trial. It also recites exhibits that were admitted into evidence and identifies individuals who testified at trial. The minute order further states that the court, having considered the testimony and evidence presented, found in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff. The order after hearing, entered the