707 East Ocean Blvd. LP v. Rogers CA2/8

Filed 5/25/23 707 East Ocean Blvd. LP v. Rogers CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

707 EAST OCEAN B320403 BOULEVARD LP, Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. 21LBCV00418

v.

JOSHUA ROGERS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Michael P. Vicencia, Judge. Affirmed.

Benjamin Porter Law Group and Elijah Porter for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ___________________________

Defendant and appellant Joshua Rogers seeks reversal of the unlawful detainer judgment entered against him on a single ground: the special verdict form did not include all facts necessary to establish his liability. Defendant fails to satisfy his burden of showing in his appellate brief, with record citations, that he timely raised this issue in the trial court below. We therefore affirm. BACKGROUND We draw the following background information from the limited record defendant provided on appeal. The record consists of a clerk’s transcript containing only a portion of the trial record. From the clerk’s transcript, we discern that the oral proceedings before the trial court were not transcribed. There is no settled statement of the trial proceedings. We have very little information in the record before us about what happened at trial. Defendant rented a housing unit from plaintiff 707 East Ocean Boulevard LP. Plaintiff discovered defendant was using the unit as a short-term rental. Plaintiff gave defendant a three-day notice to quit pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1161, subdivision 4. Among other things, the notice stated defendant’s use of the unit was unlawful because plaintiff had not registered his short-term rental as required by section 5.77.030 of the Long Beach Municipal Code. Defendant refused to quit and plaintiff sued. The matter proceeded to a jury trial. A special verdict form was prepared. It is unclear from the record who prepared it. The minute order states that “[o]utside the presence of the jury, verdict form is discussed.” Since there is no reporter’s transcript, we do not know what was discussed.