Purnell

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff’s sole contention on appeal is that by denying her application to continue the hearing on the summary judgment motion, the trial court effectively allowed her just one day to file opposition to the motion. Plaintiff urges this was error because the trial court did not have authority “to shorten the minimum statutory time regarding motions for summary judgment unless the parties stipulate to shortened time, which did not occur in this case.”

3 We conclude as a threshold matter that plaintiff has forfeited her challenge to the judgment by failing to adequately cite to the record in her appellate briefs. California Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(C), requires parties to an appeal to “[s]upport any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears.” The failure to do so constitutes a forfeiture of a party’s appellate arguments. (E.g., Perry v. Stuart (2025) 111 Cal.App.5th 472, 502, fn. 21 [appellants forfeited appellate contention by failing to support it with appropriate record citations]; Wentworth v. Regents of University of California (2024) 105 Cal.App.5th 580, 596 [Courts of Appeal “…