I'm no attorney but, it would appear that the abusers appeals were dismissed per rule 8.140(b).
"The following transaction has occurred in:
Arnold v. Fuller et al.
Case: B241450, 2nd District, Division p
Disposition date (YYYY-MM-DD): 2012-08-24
Disposition description: Dismissed per rule 8.140(b)
Disposition status as of 2012-08-24: Final
For more information on this case, go to:
For opinions, go to the following web site: http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions-slip.htm
Court of Appeal opinions are generally available on the web site by 5 p.m. on the disposition date.
Unpublished opinions are generally available on the web site by 5�p.m. on the disposition date or
by 5 p.m. on the court workday following the disposition date. "
Also, Daniel Kristof Lak very well knows that when he filed his clients appeal that the plaintiff and respondent [B241450] is represented by council and that the Converatorship of Edwina Fuller [B241452] is no longer represented by Sandra Anderson but, instead by another attorney.
I believe that what he did in relation to filing his clients appeal is just one more example of his attempts at misdirection and his never ending quest to collect legal fees from his victims and they are too stupid to see it. Greed can and will do that.
Re: Los Angeles County Superior Court Cases BP099211 & BP122665
Search by Attorney
Search by Case Number