Pardoe

Pardoe v. Salazar CA2/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 16, 2025B336831California2,949 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moor, J.

Filed 1/16/25 Pardoe v. Salazar CA2/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

DIANE PARDOE et al., B336831

Plaintiffs and Respondents, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. 23STCP00683)

JUDE SALAZAR,

Defendant and Respondent;

RICK SIEGEL,

Intervener and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Barbara Meiers, Judge. Affirmed. Rick Siegel, in pro. per., for Intervener and Appellant. Diane Pardoe, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Respondent. Sarah Pardoe, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Respondent. Jude Salazar, in pro. per., for Defendant and Respondent. ________________________ Appellant Rick Siegel, who purchased…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.