CHRISTOPHER OMAR MARSHALL
v.
KEISHA BESWICK MARSHALL
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.
An appellate court cannot review a trial court's factual findings when the appellant fails to provide a trial transcript.
“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.”
Citation to Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, explaining the necessity of a trial record for appellate review of facts
Christopher Omar Marshall appealed a trial court decision in a case against Keisha Beswick Marshall. Marshall challenged multiple factual findings mad…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Review Standards cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Howle v. Howle, 967 So. 2d 435, 436 (Fla. 4th DCA
2007) (“Husband's remaining argument, which challenges a number of the trial court's factual findings, is unreviewable by this court due to the lack of a trial transcript."); see also 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.”).