Arzate v. Cypress Financial
Plaintiff and appellant Albert R. Arzate (hereafter plaintiff) appeals from a judgment entered after the trial court sustained demurrers to his first amended complaint and denied his motion for leave to file a second amended complaint.
Court need not discuss the factual or procedural history of this case further, because plaintiff has completely failed to meet his burden of demonstrating error and prejudice, either with respect to the sustaining of the demurrer or with respect to the denial of leave to file a second amended complaint.
It is not our function to examine undeveloped claims or to make arguments for the parties. (Paterno v. State of California, supra, 74 Cal.App.4th at p. 106.) The judgment is therefore affirmed. Costs on appeal are awarded to defendants and respondents.
Comments on Arzate v. Cypress Financial