Dodging appellate sanctions

Here's a final footnote in this unpub'd decision here that sticks it to an appellant:

     Any remaining points in [Appellant's] opening brief “are simply overtaken or outflanked
by resolution of the matters which we do discuss or do not warrant discussion because
they are too fragmentary or obscure.” (Claypool v. Wilson (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 646,
659; see Tilbury, supra, 137 Cal.App.4th at p. 482.)
     [Respondent] has not sought sanctions for a frivolous appeal, nor have we issued an
order to show cause on our own motion, despite the fact that the manner of [Appellant's]
counsel’s briefing is sorely deficient. It is hard to believe that any reasonably competent
attorney would think any of the claims raised on appeal--in the manner they were raised--
had any reasonable chance of success. Our forbearance should not be construed as an
invitation to [Appellant's] counsel to repeat his disregard of appellate norms in the future.