Castle Eurasia Corp. v. Federal Home Loans Corp. CA4/2

DISCUSSION

By failing to raise the only appealable issue in the opening brief, we deem the

claim abandoned.

2 “‘An appealed-from judgment or order is presumed correct. [Citation.] Hence,

the appellant must make a challenge. In so doing, he must raise claims of reversible error

or other defect [citation], and “present argument and authority on each point made.”’”

(Conservatorship of Ben C. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 529, 544, fn. 8.)

This case is similar to Berger v. Godden (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 1113. In that

case, the appellant filed a first opening brief that was not in compliance with the

California Rules of Court and appellant was given 30 days within which to file a

conforming brief. (Id. at p. 1116.) Further, the order directed appellant to address two

specific issues in the new opening brief. (Id. at pp. 1116-1117.) The appellant filed a

second brief raising no discernible legal issues and failed to cite to any authority.

Moreover, the appellant did not address the two issues as ordered by the Court of Appeal.

(Id. at p. 1117.) The Berger court dismissed the appellant’s appeal for failing “to address

in his second brief the two issues specified by [the] court” and for…