MARTHA JEAN CADDELL, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
JOHN ROBERT CADDELL, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
Martha Jean Caddell appeals a trial court order awarding her $3,640 in back child support, disputing certain credits allowed against the accrued amount, while her ex-spouse cross-appeals arguing he was denied entitled credits. The appellate court affirmed because the appellant failed to comply with procedural rules requiring a proper record on appeal when no court reporter was present.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order because the appellant failed to provide an adequate record to demonstrate reversible error. Without a proper transcript or compliant statement of proceedings, the appellate court cannot resolve the factual issues or determine that the trial court misapplied the law.
[1] An appellate court cannot review factual issues without an adequate record of the trial proceedings.
[2] An appellant must provide a sufficient record to demonstrate reversible error.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“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.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that appellate review requires an adequate record when factual disputes are involved.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court below awarded Martha Jean Caddell $3,640 in back child support against John Robert Caddell. The trial court allowed certain credits ag…
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 Inadequate Appellate Record cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Martha Jean Caddell appeals an order awarding her $3,640 in back child support, asserting that the trial court should not have allowed certain credits against the accrued support. John Caddell cross-appeals the same order urging that credits to which he was entitled were not awarded. The proceeding below was heard without a court reporter. In lieu of a record, appellant provided a statement of the proceedings based upon her independent recollection. However, neither party fully complied with the provisions of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(4)1 which governs the preparation of a record when no transcript of the proceedings is available.
This case is controlled by the holding in 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. The trial court should have been affirmed because the record brought forward by the appellant is inadequate to demonstrate reversible error. [Citations omitted].
AFFIRMED.
GOSHORN, HARRIS and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur. . Rule 9.200(b)(4) provides:
(4) If no report of the proceedings was made, or if a transcript is unavailable, the appellant may prepare a statement of the evidence or proceedings from the best available means, including his recollection. The statement shall be served on the appellee, who may serve objections or proposed amendments thereto within 10 days of service. Thereafter, the statement and any objections or proposed amendments shall be submitted tó the lower tribunal for settlement and approval. As settled and approved, the statement shall be included by the clerk of the lower tribunal in the record.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Watson v. Raymon O. Watson, 646 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…ion judgment. We affirm in all respects except the order that the marital home be partitioned. Neither party requested it, it was not a part of any pleadings or raised in evidence, and thus was not an issue for the judge to decide. Willis v. Willis, 574 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Martinez v. Martinez, 573 So. 2d 37, 43 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), rev. den., 581 So. 2d 1309 (Fla.1991); Britt v. Britt, 552 So. 2d 323, 324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Borntraeger v. Borntraeger, 521 So. 2d 125, 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), re…
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)