Bishop v. Bishop

93 So. 3d 534, 2012 WL 3136490, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 12631
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bishop v. Bishop. Read the opinion of the Court — 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 14470
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 3, 2012·No. No. 5D11-3553·Published

Opinion

COHEN, J.

Troy L. Bishop appeals pro se from the final judgment dissolving his marriage to Debra A. Bishop. Our review of this case is limited because the record contains no transcript of the trial. Consequently, we can only address errors that appear on the face of the final judgment. See Engesser v. Engesser, 42 So.3d 249, 250 (Fla. 5th [535]*535DCA 2010). On appeal, the trial court’s ruling is presumed correct, and when no transcript is provided, a judgment that is not fundamentally erroneous will be affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979). Having reviewed the final judgment entered, we find no error.

AFFIRMED.

TORPY and EVANDER, JJ„ concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bishop v. Bishop, 93 So. 3d 534, 2012 WL 3136490, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 12631 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

93 So. 3d 534 (Bishop v. Bishop) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee
377 So. 2d 1150 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1979)
Engesser v. Engesser
42 So. 3d 249 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)