Housing Reform Coalition of Los Angeles CA2/4

Filed 9/14/15 Housing Reform Coalition of Los Angeles CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

HOUSING REFORM COALITION OF B258591 LOS ANGELES, et al., (Los Angeles County Plaintiffs and Appellants, Super. Ct. No. BS141012)

v.

CITY OF LOS ANGELES,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Luis A. Lavin, Judge. Affirmed. Rosario Perry for Plaintiffs and Appellants Housing Reform Coalition of Los Angeles, Jason Teague and Niesja Sharp. Michael N. Feuer, City Attorney and Gregory P. Orland, Senior Counsel, for Respondent City of Los Angeles.

INTRODUCTION

This appeal arises from denial of a motion for class certification brought by the Housing Reform Coalition of Los Angeles (“HRCLA”), Jason Teague, and Niesja Sharp (hereafter collectively “appellants”). As we explain, in their reply brief, appellants conceded that they did not present sufficient evidence to meet the requirements for class certification.1 Instead, they ask this court to remand the case “in order to allow Appellants to present the proper evidence for class certification.” In light of appellants’ abandonment of the merits of their appeal, we present only a brief factual and procedural history and do not address the issues presented in the briefs regarding denial of class certification. In light of the abandonment of the appeal, we affirm the denial of class certification. In this opinion, we consider the propriety of appellants’ request for remand. We conclude that remand is contrary to precedent and deny the request.