Opinion
A131499
10-04-2011
ANN C. SHIN et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. JESSICA MA, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
(Alameda County Super. Ct. No. HG08400273)
Defendant Jessica Ma in propria persona appeals from a judgment after a court trial awarding plaintiffs Ann C. Shinn et al. damages for investment losses. She contends that the judgment is not supported by substantial evidence, but her argument fails because she has not included the reporter's transcript of the trial in the record on appeal. Consequently, we affirm the judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs sued defendants Ma, Focus Management Group, LLC, and Bill Chao alleging that they retained defendants to trade stocks for them, and sustained losses when defendants made a "highly risky trade" that was contrary to the investment strategy they had promised to follow.
Defendants did not appear at trial. Plaintiffs Shin, Lin Ma, Leo Pang, and Ken D. Roe testified and offered exhibits into evidence. The court awarded principal and interest to each of the four plaintiffs.
II. DISCUSSION
Ma bases her appeal on pleadings she has included in the clerk's transcript, and exhibits defendants lodged with the trial court, three of which she states were introduced into evidence by plaintiffs. She contends that these pleadings and exhibits were insufficient to support the judgment.
"Error is never presumed on appeal. To the contrary, appealed judgments . . . are presumed correct . . . and appellant has the burden of overcoming this presumption by affirmatively showing error on an adequate record. [Citations.] 'A necessary corollary to this rule is that a record is inadequate, and appellant defaults, if the appellant . . . ignores or does not present to the appellate court portions of the proceedings below which may provide grounds upon which the decision of the trial court could be affirmed' (internal quotes and parentheses omitted); In re Valerie A. (2007) 152 [Cal.App.4th] 987, 1002-1003 [appellant's claim considered abandoned where appellant failed to provide reporter's transcript of relevant proceeding]. [¶] This rule 'is not only a general principle of appellate practice but an ingredient of the constitutional doctrine of reversible error.' [Citation.]' [¶] . . . [¶] Appellant cannot challenge sufficiency of the evidence to support a judgment when there is no transcript of the oral proceedings. [Citations]." (Eisenberg et al., Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Appeals and Writs (The Rutter Group 2010) ¶¶ 4:2 to 4:3, pp. 4-1 to 4-2 (rev. #1 2010).)
Ma speculates that plaintiffs' trial testimony was perjured, but she makes no showing of possible perjury from the trial transcript. We must presume pursuant to the foregoing authorities that the testimony supported the judgment. Moreover, to the extent Ma is suggesting the trial testimony was not credible, that determination was for the trial court, not us. It is not our role to "reweigh the evidence, resolve conflicts in the evidence, or reevaluate the credibility of witnesses." (People v. Cochran (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 8, 13, disapproved on another ground in People v. Soto (2011) 51 Cal.4th 229, 248, fn. 12.)
We recognize that Ma is not an attorney and may not be aware of the rules that govern our appellate review, but we must, in accordance with those rules, hold her to the same standards as a litigant represented by counsel in evaluating the merits of her appeal. (See, e.g., City of Los Angeles v. Glair (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 813, 819.)
III. DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
Siggins, J.
We concur:
McGuiness, P.J.
Jenkins, J.