Opinion
A167720
10-31-2024
KALEIGH KANT, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VINCENT BARTNING, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
(Solano County Super. Ct. No. FCS059562)
SIMONS, J.
Vincent Bartning (appellant) appeals from the trial court's issuance of a three-year civil harassment restraining order against him, protecting respondent Kaleigh Kant (respondent). (Code Civ. Proc., § 527.6.) Appellant argues the trial court violated his First Amendment rights by relying on protected speech activity, lacked substantial evidence of harassment, and violated his due process rights by relying on respondent's uncorroborated testimony.
Respondent's last name changed during the course of the lower court proceedings. Appellant appeared in propria persona in the trial court.
The record on appeal consists solely of minute orders, the appealed-from restraining order, appellant's notice of appeal and designation of the record, and the register of actions. Although appellant designated reporter's transcripts of the hearings as part of the record on appeal, these hearings were not reported. Appellant did not obtain an agreed or settled statement. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.120(b).)
It is a "cardinal rule of appellate review that a judgment or order of the trial court is presumed correct and prejudicial error must be affirmatively shown. [Citation.] 'In the absence of a contrary showing in the record, all presumptions in favor of the trial court's action will be made by the appellate court. "[I]f any matters could have been presented to the court below which would have authorized the order complained of, it will be presumed that such matters were presented."' [Citation.] This general principle of appellate practice is an aspect of the constitutional doctrine of reversible error. [Citation.]' "A necessary corollary to this rule is that if the record is inadequate for meaningful review, the appellant defaults and the decision of the trial court should be affirmed."' [Citation.] 'Consequently, [appellant] has the burden of providing an adequate record. [Citation.] Failure to provide an adequate record on an issue requires that the issue be resolved against [appellant].'" (Foust v. San Jose Construction Co., Inc. (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 181, 187 (Foust).) As in Foust, "[w]ithout a reporter's transcript or [any] exhibits presented at trial we cannot undertake a meaningful review of [appellant's] argument on appeal," and the appeal fails. (Ibid.)
Respondent's brief points out both the absence of an adequate record and the opening brief's violation of California Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(C) and (a)(2)(C), by asserting numerous facts not supported by the record. In his reply brief, appellant addresses neither point, instead continuing to argue errors not supported by the bare record on appeal and setting forth unsupported factual assertions. We note that similar conduct has been held sanctionable. (Foust, supra, 198 Cal.App.4th at p. 188 ["We conclude that sanctions are warranted because Foust's appeal is indisputably without merit. As shown by our discussion of the issues that Foust has raised, he has failed to present a colorable claim that the trial court erred. Foust challenged the sufficiency of the evidence following a three-day court trial during which oral and documentary evidence were presented, but elected to proceed without a reporter's transcript."].)
DISPOSITION
The order is affirmed. Respondent is awarded her costs on appeal.
We concur. JACKSON, P. J., BURNS, J.