The Rule of Cardenas v. Los Angeles Unified School District is that appellate arguments are forfeited when the opening brief cites only to trial court briefing that itself contains no record citations, under circumstances where the appellate brief fails to provide direct citations to record evidence supporting factual assertions.
Appeal from judgment after summary judgment in Superior Court, Los Angeles County.
Defendant Appellant was Jose Cardenas et al. — school safety officers, school police officers, police detectives, and other school security personnel who claimed religious objections to Covid-19 vaccination requirements.
Plaintiff Respondent was Los Angeles Unified School District — the employer who required vaccinations during the Covid-19 pandemic and moved for summary judgment.
The suit sounded in employment discrimination based on religious accommodation claims. [Not determinable from opinion text regarding cross-claims.]
The key substantive facts leading to the suit were the school district's requirement that employees receive Covid-19 vaccinations during the pandemic, and Cardenas's religious objections to complying with this vaccination mandate.
The procedural result leading to the Appeal: The trial court granted summary judgment against all 22 plaintiffs, ruling that accommodating religious objections would impose an undue hardship on the school district because unvaccinated employees would imperil students by exposing them to disease.
The key question(s) on Appeal: Whether appellate arguments are properly preserved when the opening brief supports factual assertions by citing only to trial court briefing that contains no record citations.
The Appellate Court held that Cardenas forfeited all objections to the summary judgments because their opening brief violated the cardinal rule requiring appellate briefs to fairly summarize facts with proper record citations, instead relying solely on citations to trial court briefing that itself lacked any record evidence citations.
The case is inapplicable when appellants provide proper direct citations to record evidence in their appellate briefs, or when trial court briefing cited in appellate briefs actually contains adequate record citations.
The case leaves open the merits of the underlying religious accommodation claims, as the court did not reach the substantive employment law issues due to the forfeiture ruling.
Counsel
For Appellant: Ferrone Law Group, Stefon L. Jackson
For Respondent: Jackson Lewis, Henry L. Sanchez, Peter M. Waneis, Dylan B. Carp
Amicus curiae: [None listed]