A.C. v. R.C. CA3

Filed 11/25/25 A.C. v. R.C. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Placer) ----

A.C., C102333

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. SDR0065037)

v.

R.C.,

Defendant and Appellant.

R.C. and A.C. are going through a divorce, and R.C. represents himself on this appeal challenging a domestic violence restraining order issued against him. He contends the family court erred in: (1) failing to provide a court reporter upon request; (2) permitting undisclosed witnesses to testify; (3) disregarding evidence of A.C.’s financial abuse; and (4) failing to provide adequate reasoning to support the restraining order. We affirm and conclude: (1) R.C. was not entitled to a court-provided court reporter because his request was untimely and he was not a fee waiver recipient; (2) R.C. forfeited his undisclosed witness challenge because he provides no citation to the record; (3) the settled statement shows the trial court considered and weighed the financial abuse

1

evidence; and (4) R.C. forfeited his inadequate reasoning challenge because he relies on language that does not exist in the authorities he cites. Because A.C. did not file a respondent’s brief, we decide the appeal on the record, the opening brief, and any oral argument by R.C. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.360(c)(5)(B).) FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A.C. petitioned for dissolution of her marriage with R.C. Both parties filed a request for domestic violence restraining order against each other. One day before the trial on the domestic violence restraining order requests started, R.C.’s counsel requested a court reporter from the family court. The court reporter request did not claim R.C. received a valid fee waiver. The family court held the trial without a court reporter. At trial, R.C. and one other witness testified as to A.C.’s financial abuse. The family court found R.C. had abused A.C. and R.C. failed to prove A.C.’s abuse, and it issued a restraining order against R.C. R.C. timely appeals. DISCUSSION A. Court Reporter R.C. contends the family court prejudicially erred in failing to provide him with a court reporter at trial despite his counsel’s request. We disagree. Courts are generally not required to provide a court reporter in family law proceedings upon a party’s request unless the party is entitled to a fee waiver. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.956(b)(3), (c)(2), (e)(1); Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594, 623 (Jameson).) Under rule 10.15.E. of the Placer County Superior Court Local Rules, a party must submit the request for a court reporter no less than three days prior to the