Echeverry v. Christiana Trust

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Echeverry v. Christiana Trust

215 So. 3d 194, 2017 WL 1278050, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4651

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 5, 2017

DocketNo. 3D 16-403

StatusPublished

This text of 215 So. 3d 194 (Echeverry v. Christiana Trust) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Echeverry v. Christiana Trust, 215 So. 3d 194, 2017 WL 1278050, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4651 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

LOGUE, J.

The appellant seeks review of the trial court’s Second Amended Final Judgment in favor of the appellee and raises issues involving evidentiary and factual disputes. However, there is no transcript of the proceedings. As such, we must affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal.”); Shojaie v. Gables Court Prof'l Ctr., Inc., 974 So.2d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (noting that without a transcript of the trial proceedings, “we are unable to evaluate the evidence and testimony presented at trial to ascertain whether or not the trial court’s findings and reasoning ... were well-founded”); Gleim v. Gleim, 176 So.2d 610, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965) (“It is the responsibility and duty of the appellant to provide the appellate court with a record sufficient to review the matter assigned ....”).

Affirmed.

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

LOGUE, J.

The appellant seeks review of the trial court’s Second Amended Final Judgment in favor of the appellee and raises issues involving evidentiary and factual disputes. However, there is no transcript of the proceedings. As such, we must affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal.”); Shojaie v. Gables Court Prof'l Ctr., Inc., 974 So.2d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (noting that without a transcript of the trial proceedings, “we are unable to evaluate the evidence and testimony presented at trial to ascertain whether or not the trial court’s findings and reasoning ... were well-founded”); Gleim v. Gleim, 176 So.2d 610, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965) (“It is the responsibility and duty of the appellant to provide the appellate court with a record sufficient to review the matter assigned ....”).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 So. 3d 194, 2017 WL 1278050, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/echeverry-v-christiana-trust-fladistctapp-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack