Randall v. Mousseau
2 Cal. App. 5th 929
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Randall sued Mousseau for breach of contract and common counts; bench trial occurred Jan 20–22, 2015, judgment for defendant entered Mar 9, 2015. Randall's posttrial motions were denied May 1, 2015.
- No court reporter was present for the trial; Randall moved for a settled statement under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.137 on May 15, 2015, attaching a proposed settled statement.
- Mousseau objected, arguing Randall’s choice not to hire a reporter barred her from seeking a settled statement and lodging objections to the proposed statement; he did not propose amendments.
- The trial court denied Randall’s motion in an August 14, 2015 minute order, stating the settled statement would burden the other side and the court and that the minute order sufficed.
- On appeal Randall did not timely challenge the denial of the settled statement (she argued the record was adequate); only in supplemental briefing did she assert the trial court erred—this court found that argument forfeited.
- Because no reporter’s transcript or settled statement is in the record, the Court of Appeal could not review the merits and affirmed the judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by denying motion for settled statement | Randall: denial was improper because no reporter recorded proceedings and rule 8.137 authorizes a settled statement | Mousseau: Randall voluntarily declined a reporter and thus cannot seek a settled statement; preparing one would be burdensome | Court: trial court abused discretion by failing to make required findings; denial unsupported by record, but issue forfeited for appeal because not timely raised |
| Whether a party's decision not to hire a reporter bars use of settled statement | Randall: settled statement is available regardless of who hired a reporter | Mousseau: choosing not to hire a reporter precludes settled statement | Court: rule 8.137 permits settled statements when proceedings were not reported; respondent’s argument frivolous and incorrect |
| What showing is required to deny a settled statement as unduly burdensome | Randall: burden requirement disjunctive; no significant burden shown here | Mousseau: preparing/settling statement imposes undue burden on opposing party and court | Court: trial court must make specific, supported findings of significant burden; here it made only unsupported, conclusory statements—abuse of discretion |
| Whether appellant preserved the right to appellate review despite absence of a record | Randall: opening brief asserted record was adequate; later sought remand for a settled statement | Mousseau: lack of record requires affirmance | Court: appellant must timely seek writ or raise denial in opening brief or file new designation per rule 8.137; failure to timely challenge forfeited the issue, so judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Sansome v. Superior Court, 80 Cal. 483 (1889) (trial court has duty to settle statement; cannot defeat appeal by refusing)
- Western States Const. Co. v. Municipal Ct., 38 Cal.2d 146 (1951) (trial court must settle proposed statement when proper)
- Los Angeles County Court Reporters Assn. v. Superior Court, 31 Cal.App.4th 403 (1995) (record via settled statement is authorized substitute for reporter’s transcript)
- Burns v. Brown, 27 Cal.2d 631 (1946) (trial court discretion over record must not be arbitrary)
- St. George v. Superior Court, 93 Cal.App.2d 815 (1949) (court’s power over record limited by prohibition on arbitrary action)
- Eisenberg v. Superior Court, 142 Cal.App.2d 12 (1956) (trial judge has plenary power over the record subject to nonarbitrary exercise)
- Sidebotham v. Superior Court, 161 Cal.App.2d 624 (1958) (refusal to settle statement requires specific findings of deficiency)
- Keller v. Superior Court, 100 Cal.App.2d 231 (1950) (abuse of discretion to refuse to settle statement without stating deficiencies)
- Denham v. Superior Court, 2 Cal.3d 557 (1970) (appealed judgments presumed correct; appellant must show error)
- Maria P. v. Riles, 43 Cal.3d 1281 (1987) (appellant bears burden to provide adequate record; absence of record resolves issues against appellant)
- Jade Fashion & Co. Inc. v. Harkham Indus., Inc., 229 Cal.App.4th 635 (2014) (appellant’s duty to provide adequate record on appeal)
- Elena S. v. Kroutik, 247 Cal.App.4th 570 (2016) (without transcript or settled statement, reviewing court must presume validity of judgment)