Croce

Croce v. Sanchez

Good Law
1967 Cal. App. LEXIS 1906·256 Cal. App. 2d 680·64 Cal. Rptr. 448
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 6, 1967Civ. 31173California1,305 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lillie, J.

Appellant appearing in propria persona has filed a document designated “appellants, reply brief.” It fails to comply with the requirements of the rule relating to form and content of briefs (rule 15(a), Appellate Rules, California Rules of Court) and is entirely unintelligible. While encumbered with a language barrier, appellant nevertheless lias made her argument on her testimony given in a previous case in which she was plaintiff (Croce v. Ryan, No. 717307) and an excoriation of the trial judges in both cases and the attorneys who represented her in each, abundantly clear. Respondent has filed no brief. Inasmuch as the record herein includes neither a transcript of the testimony taken at the trial nor the exhibits received in evidence, to aid us in a determination of this appeal we have ordered brought up from the court below and examined the superior court file in the within cause (Croce v. Sanchez) and plaintiff’s exhibits received in evidence at the trial thereof-—original superior court file in Croce v. Ryan, No. 717307 (Exh. 1) and reporter’s transcript of testimony taken in Croce v. Ryan, No. 717307 (Exh. 2).

The foregoing reflects the history of the within litigation. On…

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.