DISCUSSION

It is a fundamental principle of appellate procedure that a trial court order or judgment is ordinarily presumed to be correct, and the burden is on an appellant to affirmatively demonstrate the trial court committed an error that justifies reversal of the order or judgment. (Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594, 608-609; Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564; In re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 814, 822.) To meet this burden, an appellant must provide a cogent legal argument in support of his claims of error with citation to legal authority, as well as supporting references to the record. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(B), (C); Badie v. Bank of America (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 779, 784-785; Guthrey v. State of California (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 1108, 1115-1116; Duarte v. Chino Community Hospital (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 849, 856.) We are not obligated to perform this function on the appellant’s behalf and may treat the contentions as forfeited. (Lewis v. County of Sacramento (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 107, 113; Badie, at pp. 784-785.) “[C]onclusory claims of error will fail.” (In re S.C. (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 396, 408.) Appellant must also present each point separately in the opening brief under an appropriate heading, showing the nature of the question to be presented and the point to be made. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(B); Opdyk v. California Horse Racing Bd. (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 1826, 1830, fn. 4.) This is not a mere technical requirement; it is essential to the appellate process. Appellants must “present their cause

2 systematically and so arranged that those upon whom the duty devolves of ascertaining the rule of law to apply may be advised . . . of the exact question under consideration, instead of being compelled to extricate it from the mass.” (Landa v. Steinberg (1932) 126 Cal.App. 324, 325; accord, Opdyk, at p. 1830, fn. 4.) Self-represented litigants are held to the same standards as attorneys and must comply with the rules of procedure. (See Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 984-985; Kobayashi v. Superior Court (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 536, 543.) Appellant’s opening brief fails on all of these grounds. Under the circumstances, appellant has forfeited his claims of error.

DISPOSITION

The trial court’s order is affirmed. The parties to bear their own costs on appeal, if any. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.278 (a)(5).)

/s/

HORST, J.

We concur:

/s/ HULL, Acting P. J.

/s/

ROBIE, J.

 Judge of the Placer County Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

3