ROBERT D. CUMMINGS
v.
NICOLE CUMMINGS
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 Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court's judgment because the appellant failed to provide a sufficient record of the trial proceedings. Without the record, the appellate court could not review the factual or legal basis of the trial court's decision.
No, an appellate court cannot review a trial court's judgment without a record of the trial proceedings. Without the factual context provided by a record, the appellate court cannot determine if the judgment is unsupported by evidence or if the judge made a legal error.
[1] An appellant's failure to provide a complete record of trial proceedings precludes appellate review of factual disputes and claims of legal error based on the trial court…
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“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.”
This quote explains why a record is necessary for appellate review of factual issues.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant, Robert D. Cummings, appealed a judgment from the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court. The appellee, Nicole Cummings, did not appear for th…
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 Wire Fraud cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
ROBERT D. CUMMINGS,
Appellant,
v.
NICOLE CUMMINGS,
Appellee.
No. 4D18-456
[October 31, 2018]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Janis B. Keyser, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502016DR009124XXXXMB.
Robert D. Cummings, North Port, pro se. No appearance for appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See 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.”). WARNER, MAY and FORST, JJ., concur.
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Garcia v. J & J, Inc. (S.D. Fla. 2020)
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)