Jackson v. Zack CA2/8 ( 2024 )

Filed 5/20/24 Jackson v. Zack CA2/8
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT
JENNIFER LYNN JACKSON, B329654
Plaintiff and Appellant, Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. 21STCV18214
v.
LACEY K. ZACK,
Defendant and Respondent.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of
Los Angeles County, Michael L. Stern, Judge. Affirmed.
Jennifer Lynn Jackson, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and
Appellant.
Schmid & Voiles, Denise H. Greer, Patrick W. Mayer and
Dena J. Hayden Lambirth for Defendant and Respondent.
____________________
Jennifer Jackson appeals the trial court’s grant of summary
judgment to Dr. Lacey Zack. We affirm.
Zack performed shoulder replacement surgery on
Jackson. During the procedure, Zack cracked the glenoid bone in
Jackson’s shoulder. Representing herself, Jackson sued Zack for
medical negligence. Zack moved for summary judgment, filing in
support a declaration from a medical expert opining that Zack
acted within the standard of care required for orthopedic
surgeons. Jackson filed an “objection” to the motion for summary
judgment, but not a reply to the separate statement of
undisputed facts or any expert testimony. After argument, the
trial court took the matter under submission. The trial court
granted Zack summary judgment and entered judgment in her
favor. Jackson appeals.
Jackson’s appellate briefing is fatally deficient. We
presume appealed judgments are correct. (Bullock v. Philip
Morris USA, Inc. (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 655, 685.) Appellants
bear the burden of proving error and prejudice. (Widson v.
International Harvester Co. (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 45, 53.)
Appellants must offer cogent arguments, citations to relevant
legal authorities, and accurate citations to pertinent portions of
the record. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.204(a)(1)(B) & (C);
Tilbury Constructors, Inc. v. State Comp. Ins. Fund (2006) 137
Cal.App.4th 466, 482.) Failure to do so forfeits appellants’
claims. (Regents of University of California v. Sheily (2004) 122
Cal.App.4th 824, 826, fn. 1.) This duty applies to self-represented
litigants. (Barton v. New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc.
(1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 1200, 1210.)
Jackson’s difficult-to-read briefing contains no citations to
the record. While Jackson does include some cites to legal
authorities, most are inapplicable or simply general rules
relating to motions for summary judgment or civil litigation.
Jackson claims, without citation to the record, that she was
entitled to default judgment and argues the grant of summary
2
judgment should be reversed on this ground. The record,
including the clerk’s rejection of her application for default
judgment, proves otherwise. Jackson also argues neither
defendant nor the court informed her of the date of the hearing
on the motion for summary judgment, but the record shows she
received notice, she filed an opposition, and she appeared at the
hearing.
Jackson’s briefing does not identify and provide legal
analysis of any error the trial court made in granting summary
judgment to Zack. Jackson has forfeited her claims on appeal
through her failure to comply with the fundamental principles of
appellate practice and procedure. (Okorie v. Los Angeles Unified
School Dist. (2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 574, 599–600.)
DISPOSITION
We affirm the judgment and award costs to Zack.
WILEY, J.
We concur:
STRATTON, P. J.
GRIMES, J.
3