Saghafi

DISCUSSION

Appellant challenges the order granting the motion to dismiss. Among other arguments, she contends that defendants agreed to waive the deadline for bringing the case to trial, and that the trial court should have found that defendants were equitably estopped from bringing their motion to dismiss. Appellant further asserts that she suffered a due process violation because the trial court, in deciding the motion, improperly relied on new arguments raised in defendants’ reply papers, without giving appellant the opportunity to respond.

I. The Record Is Deficient

Before turning to appellant’s contentions, we again note that the record presented to this court through appellant’s appendix is deficient.

and Specialty Services–San Fernando Valley; Advanced Critical Care, Emergency and Specialty Services–Bakersfield; Advanced Critical Care & Internal Medicine, Inc.; Richard Mills; and Howard Liberson. The Veterinary defendants include: Jennifer Geiger, Elena Hadar, Stephanie Streete, Jennifer Stewart, and Yonathan Buks.

3 An appellant may properly rely on an appendix in pursuing an appeal (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.124), but the documents included in the appendix must…