DELCINA AUTUSTIN, APPELLANT,
v.
DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 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.
Affirmed dismissal where appellant failed to appear for trial and provide transcript on appeal, as the trial court's discretionary decisions are presumed correct absent evidence of abuse.
Without a trial transcript or appropriate substitute, an appellate court cannot find abuse of discretion in a trial court's dismissal for failure to appear or denial of a motion to set aside judgment.
[1] Without a transcript or appropriate substitute in the appellate record, the presumption of correctness attaching to a trial court's final judgment remains intact and an a…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“In appellate proceedings the decision of the trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error.”
Establishing the standard of review for trial court discretionary decisions on appeal.
Appellant Autustin failed to appear for a scheduled trial and did not contact the court or opposing counsel requesting a continuance. The trial court …
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.
Based upon the scant record before us, which does not include a transcript of the proceeding below or an appropriate substitute, we cannot conclude that the lower court abused its discretion when it entered a final judgment of dismissal. For this same reason, we also cannot find that the order denying appellant’s motion to set aside final judgment, due to the appellant’s failure to appear for the duly scheduled trial of this cause and/or failure to contact the court or opposing counsel requesting a continuance was an abuse of discretion. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979) (holding that “[i]n appellate proceedings the decision of the trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error.”); Prymus v. Prymus, 753 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (stating that without a transcript or proper substitute of the final hearing below “the presumption of correctness which attaches to this final judgment remains intact and we can find no abuse of discretion in this regard.”). See also Ahle v. Lyons, 575 So. 2d 1385 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (Ferguson, J. concurring) (refusal to grant continuance and subsequent dismissal of case not abuse of discretion where court did not receive a motion for continuance and counsel failed to appear for trial).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Prymus v. Annmarie Duncan Prymus, 753 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Ahle v. Lyons, 575 So. 2d 1385 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)