E&J SHOE WHOLESALE, INC., ET AL.
v.
ANAISE INOCENT

Fla. 3d DCA | 2026-02-11
No. 2025-0948
2026 FL 1485 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2026)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

E&J Shoe Wholesale appealed a lower court judgment, but the appellate court affirmed because the appellants failed to provide an adequate record of trial proceedings, making it impossible to review the underlying factual issues or alleged legal errors.


Holding

The trial court's judgment must be affirmed when the appellant fails to provide a record of trial proceedings, including witness testimony and evidentiary rulings, because without such a record, the appellate court cannot properly resolve factual issues or evaluate whether the trial court misapplied the law.


Headnotes

[1] An appellate court must affirm a trial court's judgment when no transcript of the fee hearing is provided and the judgment is not fundamentally erroneous on its face.

[2] Without a record of trial proceedings, an appellate court cannot properly resolve factual issues to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evide…

Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“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.”

Establishes the foundational requirement that a complete trial record is necessary for meaningful appellate review of factual disputes.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The opinion does not detail the underlying facts of the case. The court's focus is entirely on the procedural deficiency of an inadequate appellate re…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 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.

The trial court should have been affirmed because the record brought forward by the appellant is inadequate to demonstrate reversible error.”); Zarate v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. as Tr., 81 So. 3d 556, 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“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.").


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw