In Burnete v. La Casa Dana Apartments (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 1262, the pro. per. plaintiff sought to vacate a judgment of nonsuit in a personal injury action on grounds of mistake and excusable neglect. (Id. at p. 1264.) The appellate court observed that the "errors" at trial resulted from the plaintiff's lack of understanding of the law. (Id. at p. 1267.) For example, the plaintiff was unable to present his medical expert witness because he had failed to designate an expert, and due to inexperience, he was unable to get photographs and medical records into evidence. (Ibid.) In affirming an order denying the motion to vacate, the appellate court noted that pro. per. litigants are held to the same standards as all other litigants and attorneys: "In other words, when a litigant accepts the risks of proceeding without counsel, he or she is stuck with the outcome, and has no greater opportunity to cast off an unfavorable judgment that he or she would if represented by counsel." (Ibid.)