Watchtower contends the minute orders are irrelevant and therefore the request should be denied. We have not relied on the minute orders in our opinion, and we do not find the minute orders to be helpful in this case because, as Watchtower notes, the minute orders were not before the trial court in the instant case. (People v. Preslie (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 486, 493 [denying judicial notice of documents not presented to the trial court].)
However, J.W. relies upon the minute orders in making her argument to this court. For example, J.W. argues, “Watchtower is a repeat offender who has consistently flouted court orders to produce documents regarding its knowledge of child molestation . . . in multiple pending cases besides this case.” Because the minute orders are relevant to J.W.’s argument, we conclude they have some relevance.
DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. Respondent is awarded her costs on appeal. (Cal.
The WT doing what it does - trying to slip and slide but getting caught.