Aleksa Simich Construction v. Centeno CA2/3

California Court of Appeal Jul 8, 2014 No. B250179Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the judgment in favor of the plaintiff because the appellant failed to provide a reporter's transcript, requiring the court to presume the evidence supported the trial court's findings.

Issues

Whether the trial court's judgment was supported by substantial evidence.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It is the appellant’s burden to provide an adequate record on appeal.”

“By omitting the reporter’s transcript, Centeno has failed to establish what the parties testified or what was accepted into evidence.”

“We therefore make all reasonable inferences in favor of the judgment and assume that the missing evidence constituted substantial evidence in support of the trial court’s findings.”

Filed 7/8/14 Aleksa Simich Construction v. Centeno CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

ALEKSA SIMICH CONSTRUCTION, B250179 INC., (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. BC454576)

MARCO TULIO CENTENO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,

Rolf MichaelTreu and Ramona See, Judges. Affirmed.

Marco Tulio Centeno, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_______________________________________

Marco Tulio Centeno appeals from the judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff

Aleksa Simich Construction, Inc. (ASC) on the grounds that it was not supported by

substantial evidence. We disagree and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On February 7, 2011, ASC filed an action for breach of written contract,

quantum meruit, open book account, account stated, and foreclosure of mechanic’s lien

against Centeno. The complaint alleged that Centeno’s house had been damaged by

a fire, and that Centeno had obtained an estimate from his insurance company regarding

Aleksa Simich Construction v. Centeno CA2/3

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

MARCO TULIO CENTENO,

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

KITCHING, J.

ALDRICH, J.

AI Brief