Padgett v. Padgett

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Padgett v. Padgett

268 So. 3d 280

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 2, 2019

DocketNo. 1D17-2217

StatusPublished

This text of 268 So. 3d 280 (Padgett v. Padgett) 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

Padgett v. Padgett, 268 So. 3d 280 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Michael Padgett (the former husband) appeals the trial court's denial of his petition to modify his alimony obligation to Retha Padgett (the former wife), arguing that the evidence does not support the trial court's finding that he was capable of earning additional income. We cannot determine whether the trial court's finding was supported by the evidence due to the lack of transcript in the record on appeal, and 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.").

AFFIRMED .

B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Kelsey and Winokur, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Michael Padgett (the former husband) appeals the trial court's denial of his petition to modify his alimony obligation to Retha Padgett (the former wife), arguing that the evidence does not support the trial court's finding that he was capable of earning additional income. We cannot determine whether the trial court's finding was supported by the evidence due to the lack of transcript in the record on appeal, and 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.").

AFFIRMED .

B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Kelsey and Winokur, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 So. 3d 280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/padgett-v-padgett-fladistctapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack