Opinion
A166730
06-13-2023
In re the Marriage of HOLLY ALYCE and DANIEL PAUL BIRKBECK. v. DANIEL PAUL BIRKBECK, Respondent. HOLLY ALYCE BIRKBECK, Appellant,
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
(Napa County Super. Ct. No. 2645163)
TUCHER, P.J.
Holly Alyce Birkbeck (Wife) appeals an order denying her request to set aside a judgment. We affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
It appears from the record that the marriage of Wife and respondent Daniel Paul Birkbeck (Husband) was dissolved in 2011, and spousal support for the benefit of Wife was ordered through July 31, 2019, pursuant to the parties' marital settlement agreement (MSA). On October 12, 2022, Wife filed a request for orders that apparently seeks to set aside the judgment, including its property control provisions and the termination of her spousal support.
The family court denied Wife's motion on November 16, 2022. In doing so, it explained that the terms of the MSA prevailed over any earlier agreement between Husband and Wife. It also explained that Wife's request was time-barred by Family Code section 2122. The court awarded attorney fees to Husband. There was no court reporter for the hearing. Wife filed a timely notice of appeal.
DISCUSSION
On appeal, a judgment is presumed correct (Nielsen v. Gibson (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 318, 324), and the appellant bears the burden affirmatively to show error (Scheenstra v. California Dairies, Inc. (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 370, 403). The party challenging the judgment must provide an adequate record to assess error (ibid.), and failure to do so" 'requires that the issue be resolved against [the appellant]'" (Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594, 609). Further, "[w]hen an appellant fails to raise a point, or asserts it but fails to support it with reasoned argument and citations to authority, we treat the point as waived." (Badie v. Bank of America (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 779, 784-785.) And it is the parties' duty to point out the portions of the record that support their arguments on appeal, and any point that lacks record citations may be deemed waived. (Del Real v. City of Riverside (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 761, 768.) It is not the appellate court's job to comb the record seeking error. (Byars v. SCME Mortgage Bankers, Inc. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 1134, 1140-1141.) A party who appears in propria persona remains subject to these rules. (Nwosu v. Uba (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1229, 1246-1247.)
Wife's opening brief on appeal founders on these principles. She appears to assert that Husband procured the 2011 judgment by deceit, but she offers no argument or authority addressing the family court's conclusions that the terms of the MSA controlled spousal support and that her claim is time-barred. Nor does she provide a single citation to the record on appeal to support her claim of error. In the circumstances, Wife has not met her burden to show error.
DISPOSITION
The November 16, 2022 order is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: FUJISAKI, J., PETROU, J.