Caldwell v. Ecobaby Organics CA4/1 (2014) · DecisionDepot
Caldwell v. Ecobaby Organics CA4/1
California Court of Appeal Jun 18, 2014 No. D064078Unpublished
Filed 6/18/14 Caldwell v. Ecobaby Organics CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
MICHAEL CALDWELL, D064078
Plaintiff and Appellant,
v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2009-00091247- CU-BT-CTL) ECOBABY ORGANICS, INC.,
Defendant and Respondent.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Frederic L.
Link, Judge. Affirmed.
Michael Caldwell, in pro. per.
Gaston & Gaston and Matthew J. Faust for Defendant and Respondent.
Michael Caldwell appeals a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) entered
against him and in favor of respondent Ecobaby Organics, Inc. (Ecobaby Organics).
Caldwell contends: (1) the trial judge was biased and had a conflict of interest because of
his friendship with the father of respondent's attorney; (2) the trial judge violated
Caldwell's constitutional right to due process by stating, without supporting evidence,
that he did not believe Caldwell's testimony, thus implying Caldwell had committed
perjury; (3) there was no evidence to support the court's decision "to amend" the jury's
verdict and award $750,000 to respondents. Ecobaby Organics has not filed a
494; Amato v. Mercury Casualty Co. (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 1784, 1794; see Maria P. v.
Riles (1987) 43 Cal.3d 1281, 1295.) "We cannot presume error from an incomplete
record." (Christie v. Kimball (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1407, 1412.) " '[I]f the record is
1 California Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(C) provides that each appellate brief must "[s]upport any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears." Courts interpret this rule to mean that the assertions of fact set forth in an appellate brief must be supported by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where that fact appears. (See Brewer v. Murphy (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 928, 936, fn. 4 [defendants' assertion of fact not supported by citation to record].) Even setting aside these technical rule violations, the substance of Caldwell's briefing compels us to conclude any contentions are forfeited. 4
inadequate for meaningful review, the appellant defaults and the decision of the trial
court should be affirmed.' " (Gee v. American Realty & Construction, Inc. (2002) 99
Cal.App.4th 1412, 1416.)
Caldwell's deficient briefing, combined with the lack of reasoned analysis
pertinent to the questions at hand on appeal from the court's order granting JNOV compel
us to conclude he has forfeited any cognizable appellate contentions. As a result of these
failings, and absent any persuasive legal authority on the question, Caldwell likewise has
not demonstrated error or prejudice. Even if we reached the merits of one claim, we
would reject Caldwell's contention the trial judge "showed his bias and prejudice by
ruling against and in complete opposition to the jury on every count." On this record, we
conclude that, absent specific evidence of wrongdoing, merely because a judge rules
against a party in the course of the proceedings does not make the judge prejudiced
against that party. (See In re Guardianship of L.V. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 481, 500;
Holding. The court affirmed the judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) because the appellant failed to provide an adequate record for review and failed to present cognizable legal arguments or citations to the record.
Issues
Whether the trial judge was biased or had a conflict of interest.
Whether the trial court violated the appellant's due process rights by disbelieving his testimony.
Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court's decision to grant JNOV.
Disposition. Affirmed
Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion
“A judgment or order of the lower court is presumed correct.”
“It is the appellant's burden, not the court's, to identify and establish deficiencies in the evidence.”
“We cannot presume error from an incomplete record.”