Myret v. Group Lx

245 So. 3d 1024

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed June 27, 2018.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D17-768

Lower Tribunal No. 12-12070

________________

Myret, LLC,

Appellant,

vs.

Group LX, Inc., et al.,

Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose M.

Rodriguez, Judge.

Marva L. Wiley, P.A., and Marva L. Wiley, for appellant.

Alvarez Barbara, LLP, and Richard L. Barbara and Jose L. Torres, for appellee Group LX, Inc.

Before ROTHENBERG, C.J., and SUAREZ and LAGOA, JJ.

ROTHENBERG, C.J.

Myret, LLC (“Myret”) appeals a final judgment and the trial court’s prior

2

orders determining that Group LX, Inc. (“Group LX”) is entitled to its attorney’s fees and setting the amount of fees. In its appeal, Myret disputes the amount of the fees awarded. However, where, as here, no transcript of the hearing where the amount of the fees was addressed has been provided, and the judgment is not fundamentally erroneous on its face, we must affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979):

When there are issues of fact the appellant necessarily asks the reviewing court to draw conclusions about the evidence. 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.

See also Smith v. Orhama Inc., 907 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (holding that without the ability to see what the trial court actually found in reference to the evidence presented below, it is not possible to reverse unless there is fundamental error on the face of the trial court’s order); Ahmed v. Travelers Indem. Co., 516 So. 2d 40, 40 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (“Where there is no record of the testimony of witnesses or of evidentiary rulings, and where a statement of the record has not been prepared pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(a)(3) or (b)(3), a judgment which is not fundamentally erroneous on its face must be affirmed.”).

Affirmed.