Archuleta

Plaintiffs, appearing in propria persona,' appeal from an order dismissing their action against respondents after the court sustained respondents’ general and special demurrers to the second amended complaint without leave to amend.

Plaintiffs’ pleadings are difficult to interpret within the established legal framework, and their brief fails to enlighten us as to the nature of the action they have attempted to plead, the material facts, the relief sought, or the assignments of error with respect to the court’s action. (Rules 13 and 15, California Rules of Court.) As a general rule, it is incumbent upon appellants under these circumstances to establish that they have averred the ultimate facts required to constitute each element of a specific cause of action (Helfrich v. Kerley, 192 Cal.App.2d 726, 729 [ 13 Cal.Rptr. 753 ]; M. G. Chamberlain & Co. v. Simpson, 173 Cal.App.2d 263 [ 343 P.2d 438 ]), or to demonstrate how and in what manner they could amend their complaint so to do. (Starbird v. Lane, 203 Cal.App.2d 247, 262 [ 21 Cal.Rptr. 280 ].) Failing in this, appellants are not entitled to reversal, but under our liberal construction of their brief we have carefully considered…