ROBBINS
v.
DEUTSCHE BANK

Fla. 5th DCA | 2018-03-26
No. 5D15-3789
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2018) Negative Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

Lack of a complete trial transcript is fatal to arguments on appeal that depend on evidence presented at trial.


Headnotes

[1] An appellate court may not review trial-based arguments when the appellant fails to provide a complete and adequate transcript of the trial proceedings.

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

Facts & Procedural History

Appellant Robbins appealed a trial court decision against Deutsche Bank but failed to provide complete transcripts of the trial proceedings to support…

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) (holding that lack of a transcript is fatal to arguments on appeal which are based on the evidence at trial); Taylor v. Bateman, 927 So. 2d 1024, 1026 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (“The piecemeal transcripts deprived this court of the ability to review the record as a whole. Such record omissions are fatal to an appeal.”); see also Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Milford, 206 So. 3d 137, 137–38 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (“Here, the bank filed a copy of the note indorsed in blank with its complaint. Later at trial, through the testimony of the custodian of records for the loan servicer, the bank entered the original note into evidence. This created an inference that the bank was in possession of the note at the time it filed its complaint. Without any evidence to the contrary, this was sufficient to establish standing.” (citing Ortiz v. PNC Bank, Nat’l Ass’n, 188 So. 3d 923, 925 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016))); Labor Ready Se. Inc. v. Australian Warehouses Condo. Ass'n, 962 So. 2d 1053, 1055–56 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (“[R]eversal is not required in every case where there has not been strict compliance with rule 1.440. Rather, depending upon the circumstances, the mandatory provision of the rule may be waived.” (alteration in original) (citation omitted)).

PALMER, TORPY AND EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Bank OF NEW York Mellon v. Thompson, 230 So. 3d 638 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)
    …wer court concluded that Appellant failed to establish its standing to foreclose and the superiority of its lien. We reverse. Appellant is correct that the lower court erred in its conclusion regarding standing. See Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Milford, 206 So. 3d 137, 137-38 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (reversing order involuntarily dismissing foreclosure case for lack of standing where bank filed copy of note indorsed in blank with complaint and offered original note into evidence at trial; this evidence created infere…
  • Robbins v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr., 241 So. 3d 269 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
    …v. Bateman , 927 So. 2d 1024, 1026 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) ("The piecemeal transcripts deprived this court of the ability to review the record as a whole. Such record [*270] omissions are fatal to an appeal."); see also Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Milford , 206 So. 3d 137, 137-38 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ("Here, the bank filed a copy of the note indorsed in blank with its complaint. Later at trial, through the testimony of the custodian of records for the loan servicer, the bank entered the original note into evidence. Th…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw