Roebel

Roebel v. Vampola CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 15, 2016D067812California2,564 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 7/15/16 Roebel v. Vampola CA4/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

KENNETH ROEBEL et al., D067812

Plaintiffs, Cross-Defendants and Appellants, (Super. Ct. No. 37-2013-00042247- v. CL-BC-NC)

JAMES VAMPOLA et al.,

Defendants, Cross-Complainants and Respondents,

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Earl H.

Maas III, Judge. Affirmed.

Kenneth Roebel and Chayapha Roebel, in pro. per., for Plaintiffs, Cross-

Defendants and Appellants.

James Vampola and Jennifer Vampola, in pro. per., for Defendants, Cross-

Complainant and Respondents.

This case arises from a dispute between plaintiffs and appellants, Kenneth Roebel

and Chayapha Roebel (together Roebel) and their…

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.