Filed 1/29/19 Lewis v. Double Rock Baptist Church of Compton California CA2/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

HOWARD MILTON LEWIS et al.,

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

v.

DOUBLE ROCK BAPTIST CHURCH OF COMPTON CALIFORNIA,

Defendant and Respondent.

B280792

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. TC026064)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. John Shepard Wiley, Jr., Judge. Affirmed.

Law Offices of Barbara A. Jackson and Barbara A. Jackson for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Kinley Law Practice and Matthew L. Kinley for Defendant and Respondent.

_________________________

This case involves claims by appellants against respondent Double Rock Baptist Church of Compton California (Double Rock). Appellants appeal from a judgment of dismissal following an order sustaining demurrers to their individual complaints without leave to amend.

We find no error and affirm.

FACTS

Complaints were served in 2013.

In 2013, appellants’ cases were deemed related. Later, they were consolidated. On August 14, 2014, defense counsel sent appellants’ counsel a letter stating: “It is our understanding that you have served additional Summons[es] and Complaints on Defendants. . . . It is our belief that service is defective. Please provide copies of all Proofs of Service in which you contend service was effected.” In September 2014, appellants filed proofs of service indicating that on July 20, 2014, summonses, complaints, and amendments to the complaints were served on Deidra Burr, a purported agent for service of process for Double Rock.

In October 2014, appellants filed requests for entry of default.

On November 4, 2014, the matter came on for a trial setting conference. Counsel for both parties were present at the hearing. The ensuing minute order stated: “The [trial court] stays all requests for defaults until further order of the [trial court]. [¶] The [trial court] orders the parties to meet and confer regarding [the] merits of this case.”

More than a year and a half later, on October 28, 2016, Double Rock demurred to “63 complaints filed by counsel Barbara Jackson” on behalf of 63 of the appellants. At the same time, Double Rock separately demurred to the complaints filed by Forrest Washington and Marvin Liddell. The trial court sustained the demurrers without leave to amend.

Judgment was entered December 13, 2016.

This appeal followed.

DISCUSSION

Appellants challenge the trial court’s order staying the requests for entry of default. Though not clear, we glean that they seek a reversal of the judgment with directions to the trial court to strike the demurrers from the record and enter Double Rock’s default as to each of appellants’ complaints. They fail, however, to provide us with cogent analysis supported by relevant statutes or case law. Due to the absence of proper argument, we deem the claim of error waived. This is consistent with the established law on waiver, which states: “[E]very brief should contain a legal argument with citation to authorities on the points made. If none is furnished on a particular point, the court may treat it as waived, and pass it without consideration.’ [Citation.] [¶] It is the duty of appellants’ counsel, not the courts, ‘by argument and the citation of authorities to show that the claimed error exists.’ [Citation.]” (Sprague v. Equifax, Inc. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1012, 1050.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed. Double Rock is entitled to its costs on appeal.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.

_____________________, J.

ASHMANN-GERST

We concur:

________________________, P. J.

LUI

________________________, J.

HOFFSTADT