Bohaty

DISCUSSION

No Showing of Reversible Error

We first observe that Martin has not identified any legal errors in the trial court

proceedings. In his opening brief, he starts by expressing his "disappointment" with the

court's decision to rule in Silvie's favor, and then recites his wife's alleged "lies" in their

marital relationship and various other aspects of life. Martin also attaches new evidence

to his appellate brief—letters from two of his ex-wives and a friend's "declaration"—

dated after trial, and which were apparently not before the trial court.

Our role, as an appellate court, is limited. " 'A judgment or order of the lower

court is presumed correct. All intendments and presumptions are indulged to support it

on matters as to which the record is silent, and error must be affirmatively shown. This is

not only a general principle of appellate practice but an ingredient of the constitutional

doctrine of reversible error.' " (Denham v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1970)

2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) The burden of affirmatively demonstrating error is on the appellant.

(Pringle v. La Chapelle (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 1000, 1003.) "Briefs…