Binford Road v. Beste CA1/5

facts require affirmance of the court’s order. (Bond v. Pulsar Video Productions (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 918, 924 [“The trial court’s findings of fact

3 In the respondent’s brief, plaintiff, Binford Road LLC, contends the

receivership order arose from efforts taken by two individuals who are not named parties in this lawsuit, Bradford and John DeMeo, to collect on court judgments they obtained against defendant. Plaintiff contends defendant filed an appeal related to the collection efforts by the DeMeos in the appellate division of Sonoma County Superior Court, which appeal was then transferred to the appellate division of Marin County Superior Court (DeMeo Action). According to plaintiff, the DeMeo Action was ultimately consolidated with this action. In his reply brief, defendant vehemently denies these two cases were consolidated, insisting: “Respondent never obtained a consolidation order . . . .” Defendant also provides citations to documents related to his appeal in the DeMeo Action. We need not, however, parse these documents, mentioned for the first time in defendant’s reply brief. As stated ante, defendant wholly failed to provide this court with a recitation of the…