Mousavi

DISCUSSION

Mousavi, who is self-represented, purports to appeal both the demurrer and summary judgment rulings, but her opening brief is confusing and disjointed in most respects. Mousavi does not address the claims that were dismissed on demurrer. Nor does she suggest how the complaint could be amended to correct the pleading deficiencies. She also makes a number of factual and legal assertions without explaining their significance to the trial court's rulings or providing adequate supporting legal authority or citations to the record. In some instances, she simply poses a question (e.g., "Why is expert testimony required in this matter?") without offering any further explanation or discussion. Judgments are presumed correct and it is the appellant's burden to affirmatively demonstrate error. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564; Hernandez v. California Hospital Medical Center (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 498, 502.) That Mousavi is self-represented does not change this burden. (Dowden v. Superior Court (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 126, 129-130; Nwosu v. Uba (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1229, 1246- 1247.) We are not required to examine undeveloped claims or to make arguments…