Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
Superior Court County of Ventura No. 56-2007-00289003, Vincent J. O'Neill, Jr., Judge
Curtis Brown, in Pro Per, Appellant.
Alan E. Wisotsky, Dirk DeGenna, Law Offices of Alan E. Wisotsky, for County of Ventura, Respondent.
YEGAN, Acting P.J.
Curtis Brown appeals from the trial court’s order denying his petition for leave to file a late claim against public entity. (Gov. Code, § 946.6.) The trial court denied the petition because it found that appellant’s failure to file a timely tort claim with the County of Ventura (County) was not excused by mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. (§ 946.6, subd. (c)(1).) We affirm.
All statutory references are to the Government Code unless otherwise stated.
The record on appeal is incomplete in that appellant has not included a copy of his petition. His opening and reply briefs do not contain clear arguments supported by legal authority or citations to the record. We cannot consider these arguments. (Ojavan Investors Inc. v. California Coastal Commission (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 373, 391.)
Our review of the incomplete record, however, indicates that appellant claims his car was improperly towed by the Camarillo Police Department. He seeks reimbursement for the costs he incurred as a result. The car was towed on March 23, 2006. He filed his claim with the County on January 22, 2007. Section 911.2 requires the claim to have been filed within six months of the loss. Appellant’s claim was untimely.
Appellant contends she was unable to file a timely claim because of an injury he sustained to his wrist. The record includes a letter from a physician indicating appellant was disabled from a work-related wrist injury for most of the month of August 2006. The trial court correctly found that this temporary disability did not excuse appellant’s late claim. There is no evidence that appellant was unable to file and serve the claims form during the entire 10 months that elapsed between his car being towed and the filing of his claim. (Department of Water & Power v. Superior Court (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 1288, 1293; Harrison v. County of Del Norte (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 1, 5.)
The judgment is affirmed. Each party will bear its own costs on appeal. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.278, subd. (a)(5).)
We concur: COFFEE, J. PERREN, J.