SOUTH FLORIDA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
S. A. DANSYEAR, 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 South Florida Apartment Association appealed a $12,000 judgment entered against it in a debt recovery action, claiming the statute of frauds barred the claim. The appellate court affirmed the judgment because the appellant failed to provide a trial transcript, making it impossible to review the statute of frauds defense.
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment because the appellant failed to provide a sufficient record for appellate review. Without a trial transcript or stipulated statement of facts, the court could not determine whether the evidence established the statute of frauds defense as a matter of law and therefore assumed the trial court ruled correctly.
[1] An appellate court must assume the trial court ruled correctly when the appellant fails to provide a sufficient record on appeal to review the assigned error.
[2] An appeal from an order denying a motion for rehearing on a prior order requiring a supersedeas bond is not an appealable order.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“It is the responsibility and duty of the appellant to provide the appellate court with a record sufficient to review the matter assigned as error.”
Establishes the foundational procedural requirement that appellants must provide adequate records for appellate review
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceS. A. Dansyear brought an action to recover an alleged debt against the South Florida Apartment Association. A trial was conducted in 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 Action To Recover Debt cases and more on FLexlaw
[*711] HUBBART, Judge.
This case is an appeal from a final judgment entered in favor of the appellee, S. A. Dansyear, in the amount of $12,000 in his action to recover on an alleged debt against the appellant, South Florida Apartment Association, Inc. The appellant assigns as error the trial court finding in favor of the plaintiff and contends that the action herein is barred by the statute of frauds. Section 725.01, Florida Statutes (1975). We affirm.
The final judgment in favor of the appellee recites that a trial was conducted and testimony taken thereon in the trial court. The appellant has failed to include a transcript of this testimony in the record on appeal. Fla.App. Rules 3.6 d(2), e, f. In lieu thereof, the appellant has failed to file a stipulated statement of facts containing the substance of the testimony at the time of the trial in this cause. Fla.App. Rule 3.6 h. It is the responsibility and duty of the appellant to provide the appellate court with a record sufficient to review the matter assigned as error. Gleim v. Gleim, 176 So. 2d 610 (Fla.3d DCA 1965) and cases collected. In the absence of such a trial record, we find it impossible to determine whether the evidence at trial established the defense of the statute of frauds as a matter of law. This court, accordingly, has no alternative but to assume that the trial court ruled correctly and affirm the decision below. Reicheck v. Florida Bond and Mortgage Co., 237 So. 2d 83 (Fla.4th DCA 1970); Belfield v. Lochner, 162 So. 2d 668 (Fla.2d DCA 1964).
The appellant also appeals from an order denying its motion for rehearing on a prior order requiring the appellant to post a supersedeas bond. We dismiss this appeal sua sponte. This court has no jurisdiction to entertain such an appeal since a motion to review a supersedeas order under Fla. App. Rule 5.10 is the proper method to seek appellate relief from an arbitrary or unreasonable supersedeas order. No such motion was filed in this case. Moreover, the super-sedeas order complained of is not included in the record on appeal.
Affirmed as to the appeal from the final judgment; dismissed as to the appeal from the order denying the motion for rehearing on the supersedeas order.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)…o 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. E. g., South Florida Apartment Association, Inc. v. Dansyear, 347 So. 2d 710 (3d DCA Fla. 1977); Strickland v. Lewis, 328 So. 2d 244 (1st DCA Fla. 1976); Troutman v. Couture, 98 Fla. 889, 124 So. 443 (1929). See also cases cited above for conflict. The order of the district court of appeal is quashed and the cause remanded…
-
Clar v. The Cont'l Ins. Cos. & The Glens Falls Ins. Co., 510 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979); South Fla. Apartment Assoc, v. Dansyear, 347 So. 2d 710, 711 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert, denied, 354 So. 2d 985 (Fla. 1977); Moore v. Sky Realty, Inc., 344 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Veterans Loan Auth. v. Danzo, 210 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968).…
-
Smith v. Orhama Inc., 907 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…re a statement of the record has not been prepared pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(a)(3) or (b)(3), a judgment which is not fundamentally erroneous on its face must be affirmed”); 1 South Fla. Apartment Ass’n, Inc. v. Dansyear, 347 So. 2d 710, 711 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)(finding that it is the responsibility of the appellant to provide a sufficient record for review, and that failure to do so leaves the court with no alternative but to assume that the court ruled correctly)- We, therefore, a…
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Belfield v. Lochner, 162 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Carpenter v. State, 176 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Gleim v. Gleim, 176 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Reicheck v. Fla. Bond & Mortg. Co., 237 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)