Garcia v. First Metropolitan Mortgage CA2/2

California Court of Appeal Oct 26, 2020 No. B292856Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the judgment against the appellant because she failed to provide a reporter's transcript to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence, failed to provide a coherent legal argument in her brief, and lacked standing to appeal as she did not own the foreclosed property.

Issues

Whether the judgment is supported by sufficient evidence in the absence of a reporter's transcript.
Whether the appellant's brief provides sufficient legal argument for appellate review.
Whether the appellant has standing to challenge a foreclosure on property she deeded to a corporation.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We cannot review the sufficiency of the evidence because appellant did not provide a reporter’s transcript.”

“An appellate court is not required to examine undeveloped claims, nor to make arguments for the parties.”

“Appellant has not demonstrated why, as someone who does not own the Property, she has standing to contest the foreclosure.”

Filed 10/26/20 Garcia v. First Metropolitan Mortgage CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

ALICIA GARCIA, B292856

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC623630) v.

FIRST METROPOLITAN MORTGAGE CORP. et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court for Los Angeles County, Gregory Wilson Alarcon, Judge. Affirmed. Alicia Garcia, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Hennelly & Grossfeld and Anthony C. Kohrs for Defendants and Respondents.

Appellant Alicia Garcia filed a wrongful foreclosure action. A jury tried her case and found in favor of respondent First Metropolitan Mortgage Corporation (FMMC). Acting in propria persona, appellant challenges the judgment. We affirm the judgment because (1) appellant did not supply a reporter’s transcript of the trial, which prevents us from reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence; (2) appellant’s brief contains no discernible argument; and (3) appellant lacks standing because she admittedly deeded away the foreclosed property in 2008, and the corporation that actually owns the property did not appeal the judgment. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In 2006, appellant obtained loans from respondent First Metropolitan Funding Corporation. The loans were secured by deeds of trust on real property on Patton Street in Los Angeles (the Property). Appellant defaulted on the debt in 2015; a notice of trustee’s sale was recorded. The Property sold at public auction in 2016. After the trustee’s sale, FMMC filed an unlawful detainer action against appellant. One month later, appellant filed this lawsuit alleging fraud and seeking to set aside the foreclosure. Appellant’s coplaintiffs are Karen Lopez Garcia and I.C.A. Investments, Inc.1 Appellant moved to consolidate FMMC’s unlawful detainer action with her wrongful foreclosure action, without success. The unlawful detainer action was tried by a jury; FMMC prevailed. Appellant’s trial brief in the wrongful foreclosure action states that she and Karen Garcia “were owners of a residence

Garcia v. First Metropolitan Mortgage CA2/2

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

ALICIA GARCIA, B292856

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

ASHMANN-GERST, J.

HOFFSTADT, J.

AI Brief