ENEIDA CHIRINO, APPELLANT,
v.
PEDRO R. CHIRINO, APPELLEE
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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment because the absence of a transcript prevented it from reviewing the evidence and determining if reversible error occurred.
The former wife appealed provisions of a final judgment of dissolution concerning the marital home, alimony, and attorney's fees. No court reporter wa…
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 Without Transcript cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal, the former wife, Enei-da Chirino, challenges the provisions in the final judgment of dissolution that pertain to the marital home, alimony and attorney’s fees and costs. We are compelled to affirm because, in the absence of a transcript, we are unable to determine conclusively that an error was made. See Santoro v. Santoro, 642 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Instead, we must presume that the findings in the judgment are correct. See Hirsch v. Hirsch, 642 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).
The record contains no transcript of the final hearing because no court reporter was present. Therefore, we are unable to evaluate the former wife’s allegations that error exists in the trial court’s findings and conclusions. The decision of the trial court comes to this court clothed in a presumption of correctness, and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate reversible error. See Casella v. Casella, 569 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). However, even where the appellant fails to provide a transcript, the absence of a transcript does not preclude reversal where an error of law is apparent on the face of the judgment. See Casella, 569 So. 2d 848. Therefore, we must consider whether any of the issues raised address an error of law.
While it is not altogether clear to us why the trial court entered an order that will no doubt result in the former wife and minor child moving out of the marital home, we cannot say that the ruling is erroneous as a matter of law. Notwithstanding the fact that the law favors allowing the residential parent to reside in the marital home with the minor child, it is not per se error for the trial court to rule otherwise. Without a transcript, we cannot examine the testimony and evidence upon which the trial court based its ruling and, therefore, we affirm.
Affirmed.
ALTENBERND, A.C.J., FULMER, J„ and RAMSBERGER, PETER, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (23 total)
-
Esaw v. Esaw, 965 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…2d 780, 782 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (“[Wjhere a trial transcript or proper substitute does not appear in the record on appeal, the trial court’s order must be upheld unless the order is fundamentally erroneous on its face.”); see also Chirino v. Chirino, 710 So. 2d 696, 697 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (stating that “the absence of a transcript does not preclude reversal where an error of law is apparent on the face of the judgment”). We. reject this argument. In awarding alimony in its final judgment of dissolution of mar…
-
Todd v. Guillaume-Todd, 972 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…ails to provide a transcript, the absence of a transcript does not preclude reversal where an error of law is apparent on the face of a judgment. Soto v. Soto, — So. 2d-, 32 Fla. L. Weekly D182 (Fla. 2d DCA Jan. 5, 2007) (quoting Chirino v. Chirino, 710 So. 2d 696, 697 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)); Dorsett v. Dorsett, 902 So. 2d 947, 950 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). The standard of review of a question of law is de novo. Henderson v. Henderson, 905 So. 2d 901, 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). The Florida legislature has decreed that…
-
Soto v. Soto, 974 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…ent must be affirmed. The Former Husband argues that “even where the appellant fails to provide a transcript, the absence of a transcript does not preclude reversal where an error of law is apparent on the face of the judgment.” Chirino v. Chirino, 710 So. 2d 696, 697 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). Such a situation is present here. On its face, the final judgment contains several errors that require us to reverse and remand for an evidentia-ry hearing on the issue of the amount of the Former Husband’s income. Because…
Previewing 3 of 23 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Casella v. Casella, 569 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Hirsch v. Hirsch, 642 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
- Santoro v. Edda L. Santoro, 642 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)