Sanders v. Sanders CA5
Filed 12/3/21 Sanders v. Sanders CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
LEONARD SANDERS, F080985 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 20CEFL00357) v.
PHILLIP SANDERS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Lisa M. Gamoian, Judge. Phillip Sanders, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant. Kahn, Soares & Conway, Michael J. Noland, Jennifer E. Dunne, and Ian Brady for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- Phillip Sanders appeals from the trial court’s February 13, 2020, order granting his brother, Leonard Sanders, a Domestic Violence Restraining Order against him. On appeal, Phillip contends that he was not adequately served with either the temporary
* Before Poochigian, Acting P. J., Meehan, J. and Snauffer, J.
restraining order or the notice of hearing, and that the trial court abused its discretion by not reviewing Phillip’s video evidence, refusing to admit Phillip’s hearsay testimony, and admitting Leonard’s hearsay testimony. Because Phillip’s appeal improperly raises objections not raised in the trial court and is unsupported by legal citations and cogent legal arguments, we may reject it on that basis alone. However, even considering the merits, we find that no argument he raises warrants overturning the trial court’s order. We affirm. FACTS Leonard filed a Request for Domestic Violence Restraining Order against Phillip on January 21, 2020.1 The court issued a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) that same day protecting Leonard until the hearing scheduled for February 13. At the February 13 hearing, both Leonard and Phillip appeared without witnesses, and the court heard both sides of the story. Leonard’s Testimony Leonard claimed he was the primary caretaker for his mother who suffered a stroke on December 24, 2019. Both he and his brother, Phillip, resided at their mother’s house. On January 18, their mother was going to amend her trust to exclude Phillip, which Leonard explained to Phillip that day. After a notary arrived at the house, Leonard and the notary entered his mother’s room so she could execute the documents. Leonard closed the door. According to Leonard, Phillip “barged” through the door. Leonard attempted to prevent Phillip from entering the room, and Phillip struck Leonard in the eye with a closed fist. Leonard received a cut on his eye. Leonard called the sheriff. Once the sheriff arrived, Phillip agreed to leave so that Leonard could take care of their mother. Leonard proceeded to obtain the January 21
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)