Pacific Trust Bank v. England CA4/2 (2014) · DecisionDepot
Pacific Trust Bank v. England CA4/2
California Court of Appeal Dec 11, 2014 No. E059304Unpublished
Filed 12/11/14 Pacific Trust Bank v. England CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
PACIFIC TRUST BANK,
Plaintiff and Respondent, E059304
v. (Super.Ct.No. CIVRS1304232)
LONNIE FRANK ENGLAND, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Thomas S. Garza,
Judge. Affirmed.
Lonnie Frank England, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant.
Winston & Strawn, Gayle I. Jenkins and Jennifer Rappoport for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant and appellant Lonnie Frank England appeals a workplace violence
restraining order obtained by his former employer, plaintiff and respondent Pacific Trust
1
Bank (the Bank), doing business as Mission Hills Mortgage. (Code Civ. Proc., § 527.8.)
The Bank petitioned for the order on June 18, 2013, the day it terminated England’s
employment.
The order was issued following a July 2, 2013, hearing, and expires on July 2,
3 Rule 8.120(b) provides: “If an appellant intends to raise any issue that requires consideration of the oral proceedings in the superior court, the record on appeal must include a record of these oral proceedings in the form of one of the following: [¶] (1) A reporter’s transcript under rule 8.130; [¶] (2) An agreed statement under rule 8.134; or [¶] (3) A settled statement under rule 8.137.”
6
IV. DISPOSITION
The workplace violence restraining order issued on July 2, 2013, and expiring on
July 2, 2016, is affirmed. The Bank shall recover its costs on appeal. (Rule 8.278.)
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
KING J.
We concur:
McKINSTER Acting P. J.
MILLER J.
7
AI Brief
AI-generated · verify before citing
Holding. The court affirmed the workplace violence restraining order, holding that the appellant failed to provide an adequate record of the oral proceedings to support his claims of error and that witness bias concerns the weight, not the admissibility, of evidence.
Issues
Whether the trial court erred in refusing to consider the appellant's retaliation defense.
Whether the trial court erred in admitting testimony from allegedly biased witnesses.
Whether the appellant provided an adequate record on appeal to support his claims of error.
Disposition. Affirmed
Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion
“An appellant has a duty to provide an adequate record on appeal to support his claims of error, and in the absence of an adequate record, the judgment is presumed correct.”
“Lastly, any bias of the witnesses went to the weight, not the admissibility, of their testimony.”