When will the Court require an independent review of the moving and opposing papers?

The majority attempts to avoid this requirement of an independent review of the moving and opposing papers by citing Sprague v. Equifax, Inc. (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 1012, 1050, 213 Cal.Rptr. 69 for the proposition that because Henriksen does not contend on appeal that there were triable issues of material fact, it need not consider such issue, but that instead it need only "address[ ] the issue raised by him."

There are two problems with the majority's position. First, Sprague v. Equifax, Inc. is inapplicable in this situation.

In Sprague v. Equifax, Inc., the appellants contended that the trial court had improperly refused to give certain jury instructions. However, they made no attempt to argue the applicability of the refused instructions to the facts of their particular case, nor did they cite any authority for giving such instructions in such a case. Likewise, they failed to demonstrate how the failure to give the requested instructions could have prejudiced them.