Neely v. Washington Mutual Bank

Filed 1/16/07  Neely v. Washington Mutual Bank CA2/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b).  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

          APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court for Los Angeles County, David A. Workman, Judge.  Affirmed.

          James Ricardo Neely, in propria persona, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

          Edward J. McNamara, Office of the General Counsel, for Defendant and Respondent Washington Mutual Bank.

          Plaintiff and appellant James Ricardo Neely appeals from a judgment entered against him in an action he filed against Washington Mutual Bank (Washington Mutual), Wells Fargo Bank (Wells Fargo), Howard CDM, Pierce Enterprise, Carpenters Southwest Administrative Corp. (Carpenters Southwest), and Alma Neely.  Appellant was incarcerated throughout the litigation of this action.  He contends on appeal that he was denied due process because the trial court refused to issue an order to the penal institution to allow him to participate telephonically in the hearings in his action.  Appellant failed, however, to provide an adequate record to establish any error.  Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

          Our recitation of the factual and procedural background of this case is hampered by the inadequacy of the record appellant provided.  Appellant did not designate the complaint to be included in the clerk's transcript.  However, other documents in the record indicate that appellant filed his complaint on July 15, 2005, alleging claims for negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and conversion.  He alleges that certain defendants released or issued his paychecks or benefit checks to defendant Alma Neely in 1999, 2000, and 2001 without his consent, and that Washington Mutual and Wells Fargo cashed those checks without his authorization. 

          Alma Neely and Washington Mutual each filed demurrers to the complaint, on December 29, 2005 and January 6, 2006, respectively.  Wells Fargo and Carpenters Southwest each answered the complaint on January 10, 2006 and January 11, 2006, then moved for judgment on the pleadings on February 21, 2006 and March 3, 2006, respectively.  The record contains appellant's opposition to Washington Mutual's demurrer (filed on Feb. 10, 2006), but no other documents related to either demurrer, including any ruling.  The record also contains appellant's opposition to Wells Fargo's motion for judgment on the pleadings and a judgment in favor of Wells Fargo and Carpenters Southwest indicating that on April 3, 2006, their motions for judgment on the pleadings had been granted without leave to amend. 

          The only notice of appeal in the record is dated March 16, 2006, and was filed on March 23, 2006.  It states:  â€