Miller v. Clayton CA4/1

Filed 4/11/25 Miller v. Clayton CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES P. MILLER, D082766

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2023- 00017036-CU-HR-EC) JON R. CLAYTON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Peter A. Lynch, Judge. Affirmed. Jon Clayton, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant. James Miller, in pro. per.; The Law Offices of Patrick L. McCrary and Patrick L. McCrary for Plaintiff and Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

Jon Clayton (Clayton), a self-represented litigant, appeals from a Code

of Civil Procedure2 section 527.6 civil harassment restraining order prohibiting him from contacting James Miller (Miller) and Miller’s wife and daughter. Clayton is appearing in propria persona as he did in the trial court. Although self-represented, Clayton must follow the same rules of appellate procedure as an attorney. (See Stover v. Bruntz (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 19, 31 [“ ‘as is the case with attorneys, [self-represented] litigants must follow correct rules of procedure’ ”]; accord Nwosu v. Uba (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1229, 1247 (Nwosu) [a self-represented party “ ‘is to be treated like any other party and is entitled to the same, but no greater consideration than other litigants and attorneys’ ”].) A trial court’s judgment or order is presumed correct, and it is the appellant’s burden to affirmatively show error on appeal. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564 [“ ‘All intendments and presumptions are indulged to support it on matters as to which the record is silent, and error must be affirmatively shown.’ ”]; accord Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594, 608–609 (Jameson).) To make this showing, the appellant must present meaningful legal analysis supported by citations to facts in the record and legal authority to support the claim of error. (Multani v.