Wright v. Wright, 431 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). · Go Syfert
Search
Wright v. Wright, 431 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“f a case is considered worthy of litigating, it follows that the testimony adduced before the trier of fact should be reported and transcribed so that the appellate court could have before it a record for its consideration in the event an appeal is deemed necessary.”
44 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Malone v. City of Satellite Beach (fladistctapp, 1995-03-24)
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983 2004 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers.
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Malone v. City of Satellite Beach
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · signal: cf. · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
f a case is considered worthy of litigating, it follows that the testimony adduced before the trier of fact should be reported and transcribed so that the appellate court could have before it a record for its consideration in the event an appeal is deemed necessary.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Meadows v. Jackson
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium
See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979); Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177, 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Henderson v. Mickelson
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium
Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177, 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services ex rel. Heinold v. Schwass
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1993 · confidence medium
See Walt v. Walt, 596 So.2d 761, 762 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); See also Hoover v. Sprecher, 610 So.2d 99, 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177, 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Caratozzola v. State
Fla. Cir. Ct. · 1989 · confidence medium
Wright , at 178 (Fla. 5DCA 1983).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Novom v. Novom
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1987 · confidence medium
Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979); Glace & Radcliffe, Inc. v. City of Live Oak, 471 So.2d 144, 145 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Pape v. Pape, 444 So.2d 1058, 1061 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177, 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Lambert v. Lambert, 340 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gardner v. Caldes
Fla. Cir. Ct. · 1984 · confidence medium
Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177,178 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983) Also, in this final judgment in paragraphs 2 and 3, Judge Gordon granted the following injunctive relief: (2) That the plaintiff, Philip Gardner, is directed not to call, contact, or to interfere with the defendant, Freida Caldes, without prior permission of this court. (3) That the plaintiff, Philip Gardner, is directed to stay away from Lillie Zigman without an appropriate Court or proper jurisdiction, for if Philip Gardner violates this provision, he will be placed in custody of the Dade County Sheriff’s Department for a period of ti…
cited Cited "see" Hickey v. Burlinson
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited "see" Kelso v. Kelso
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited "see" Finley v. Finley
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited "see" Morris v. Weaver
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited "see" Speer v. Mason
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited "see" Bielawski v. Unemployment Appeals Commission
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
discussed Cited "see" Estrada v. Unemployment Appeals Com'n
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983) (the findings and judgments of the lower tribunal come to the appellate court with a presumption of correctness and the appellant has the burden of submitting an adequate record to support his appeal).
discussed Cited "see" Brake v. Murphy
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See Boylan v. Boylan, 571 So.2d 580 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (citing Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)); Brice v. State, 419 So.2d 749 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); In re Guardianship of Coolidge, 368 So.2d 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979).
cited Cited "see" Thompson v. Thompson
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
cited Cited "see" Walker-Seaman v. Garwood
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1984 · signal: see · confidence high
See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Hadley v. Cox
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1985 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (no transcript of hearing on final judgment of dissolution on appeal from that judgment) and Mills v. Heenan, 382 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (no transcript of hearing on order appealed).
Alfred Gene WRIGHT, Appellant,
v.
Huretta Moss WRIGHT, Appellee.
82-760.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Apr 6, 1983.
431 So. 2d 177
Frank D. Upchurch, Jr..
Cited by 39 opinions  |  Published

Fred S. Disselkoen, Jr., of Duffett, Seps & Akers, Ormond Beach, for appellant.

Garrett L. Briggs, of Adams & Briggs, Daytona Beach, for appellee.

FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., Judge.

The husband appeals from a final judgment of dissolution which awarded the wife[*178] partial attorney's fees and the husband's interest in the marital home as lump sum alimony. The question is whether the statement of the evidence submitted in lieu of the transcript of the hearing is sufficient for purposes of appellate review. We hold that it is not and affirm.

The trial in this cause was not transcribed. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(3) provides the procedures to be followed where no transcript of the proceedings is available:

If no report of the proceedings was made, or if a transcript is unavailable, the appellant may prepare a statement of the evidence or proceedings from the best available means, including his recollection. The statement shall be served on the appellee, who may serve objections or proposed amendments thereto within 10 days of service. Thereafter, the statement and any objections or proposed amendments shall be submitted to the lower tribunal for settlement and approval. As settled and approved, the statement shall be included by the clerk of the lower tribunal in the record.

Pursuant to this rule, the husband prepared a statement of the evidence. The wife filed her objections to the evidence and proposed amendments to the statement. The statement, objections and amendments were then submitted to the trial court for settlement and approval.

In attempting to reconstruct the evidence, the judge observed that the trial was held more than five months ago, and that he had virtually no recollection of the testimony independent of his notes. As a consequence, the judge stated that he could only settle certain factual disputes.

It is well established that the findings and judgment of the trial court comes to the appellate court with a presumption of correctness and may not be disturbed in the absence of a record demonstrating error. Mills v. Heenan, 382 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). It is equally well established that the burden is on the appellant to bring before the appellate court a record adequate to support his appeal. Id. We believe that a statement of evidence as provided in rule 9.200(b)(3) may be substituted for a report or transcript of the proceedings only when all relevant factual disputes have been settled and the statement of evidence is approved by the lower tribunal. When the trial court specifically states that it cannot settle all relevant factual disputes, the statement of evidence does not constitute a complete and adequate record for appellate review. We therefore have no alternative but to affirm the judgment below.

We also take this opportunity to reiterate what our sister court in Gordon v. Burke, 429 So.2d 36 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) recently observed: if a case is considered worthy of litigating, it follows that the testimony adduced before the trier of fact should be reported and transcribed so that the appellate court could have before it a record for its consideration in the event an appeal is deemed necessary.

AFFIRMED.

DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur.