Pay Up Jr v. Rechnitz CA2/8

California Court of Appeal Feb 19, 2026 No. B332788Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the appellants forfeited all claims of error by failing to cite relevant evidence or provide reasoned legal arguments in their appellate briefs.

Issues

Whether the trial court's factual findings regarding fraud, civil theft, and breach of contract were supported by sufficient evidence.
Whether the appellants waived their claims of error by failing to discuss trial testimony in their appellate briefs.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Due to serious defects in their appellate briefs, defendants have forfeited all the claims of error that they raise on appeal.”

“An appellant’s failure to comply with any of these requirements may result in a waiver of the appellant’s claims on appeal.”

“By failing to discuss that testimony, defendants have forfeited any claim of error related to the court’s findings that they challenge on appeal.”

Filed 2/19/26 Pay Up Jr v. Rechnitz CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

PAY UP JR, LLC, B332788

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 20SMCV00216) v.

JONA RECHNITZ et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Mark Epstein, Judge. Affirmed. Robert W. Hirsh & Associates and Robert W. Hirsh for Defendants and Appellants. Frandzel Robins Bloom & Csato, Michael Gerard Fletcher, and Hal D. Goldflam for Plaintiff and Respondent. _________________________________

INTRODUCTION Defendants Jona Rechnitz and Jadelle Jewelry & Diamonds, LLC (Jadelle Jewelry) appeal from the trial court’s judgment entered in favor of plaintiff Victor Franco Noval1 after a bench trial. Defendants contend insufficient evidence supports several of the court’s findings, and that the court abused its discretion in admitting certain pieces of evidence. Due to serious defects in their appellate briefs, defendants have forfeited all the claims of error that they raise on appeal. Accordingly, we affirm. BACKGROUND 1. The loans In 2019, Noval loaned about $6 million, through a series of installments, to Jadelle Jewelry. Before Noval advanced each installment of the loan to Jadelle Jewelry, Rechnitz pledged some jewelry as collateral for the loan. Rechnitz assured Noval that the total value of the jewelry was higher than the total value of the loan. In March 2019, Noval and Jadelle Jewelry executed a document entitled, “DEBT ACKNOWLEDGMENT, PROMISSORY NOTE AND SECURITY AGREEMENT” (Promissory Note). The Promissory Note memorializes a portion of the loan, specifically four installments totaling $2.85 million that Noval advanced to Jadelle Jewelry between January and March 2019. The Promissory Note sets forth the terms of repayment for those installments, including the maturity date for

Pay Up Jr v. Rechnitz CA2/8

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

PAY UP JR, LLC, B332788

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

VIRAMONTES, J.

STRATTON, P. J.

SCHERB, J.

AI Brief