Talassazan v. Talassazan CA2/4

Filed 2/18/21 Talassazan v. Talassazan CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

MOJGAN TALASSAZAN, B297564 (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. SD028001)

v.

ALBERT TALASSAZAN,

Appellant.

APPEAL from a post-judgment order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Doreen B. Boxer, Commissioner. Affirmed. Albert Talassazan, in pro. per., for Appellant. Jeff Lewis Law, Sean C. Rotstan and Jeffrey Lewis for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Albert Talassazan appeals from a post-judgment order renewing a December 2017 Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DVRO) in favor of Albert’s ex-wife, respondent Mojgan Talassazan.1 The DVRO required that Albert refrain from contacting and maintain a specified distance from Mojgan and the parties’ three minor children, except that Albert was permitted limited visitation. Albert takes issue only with the portion of the renewed DVRO limiting his visitation rights. Because Albert fails to provide a record that permits meaningful review of the challenged order and fails to provide appropriate record citations or coherent legal argument, he has forfeited his arguments and we affirm the trial court’s order.

BACKGROUND The woefully incomplete appellate record reveals the following: In April 2014, judgment was entered terminating the parties’ marriage. On December 15, 2017, the family law court issued a one- year DVRO requiring that Albert have no contact with and maintain a distance of at least 100 yards from Mojgan and the parties’ three minor children. An exception to the DVRO permitted Albert one monitored three-hour visit per week with the children in a therapeutic setting until mid-March 2018. The order stated that “[e]ither party may file a request for order for visitation after 3 months from” December 15, 2017.