California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Lo v. Chan, B261883, B261885 (Cal. App. 2015):
In a judgment roll appeal, "[t]he sufficiency of the evidence is not open to review. The trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law are presumed to be supported by substantial evidence and are binding on the appellate court, unless reversible error appears [on the face] of the record." (Bond v. Pulsar Video Productions (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 918, 924.) Because we have no record of the oral proceedings at the renewal hearing, we must presume that sufficient evidence was presented at the hearing that appellants harassed respondent. (See Diamond View Limited v. Herz (1986) 180 Cal.App.3d 612, 615, fn. 2.)3
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.