Marriage of Terrell CA1/1

DISCUSSION

I. Procedural Defects On Appeal

Lila correctly notes that Fred’s appeal is procedurally defective in that his appellant’s appendix is not consecutively numbered, is incorrectly indexed, and omits some necessary documents. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.144.) Lila has submitted her own appendix and asks that we impose sanctions against Fred. Given that the record in this case is relatively small, and that between the two appendices we do have a complete appellate record, we decline to impose any sanctions against Fred or his counsel.

II. The Denial of Fred’s Request for Relief from Default Was Not an Abuse of

Discretion Section 473 provides in pertinent part that “[t]he court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. . . .” (§ 473, subd. (b).) Such a motion for relief from default is addressed to the trial court’s sound discretion; an appellate court will not interfere without a clear showing of abuse of that discretion. (Burnete v. La Casa Dana Apartments (2007)…