Wells v. Wells

Summary

The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed a supplemental judgment modifying timesharing and parental responsibility because the appellant failed to provide a trial transcript or timely create an approved statement of the evidence. The court held that Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(f)(2) does not permit creation of a previously nonexistent substitute transcript and denied the appellant's late motion under rule 9.200(b)(5).

Holdings

1. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(f)(2), which permits an appellant to supplement an incomplete record, applies to portions omitted from an otherwise existing record and does not entitle an appellant to create a substitute for a transcript that was never made or is unavailable.
2. An appellate court is not required to afford an appellant a second opportunity to create and approve a statement of the evidence or proceedings, particularly when the appellant knew of the record deficiency and waited until a late stage of the appeal to act.
3. The supplemental judgment is affirmed because the absence of a transcript or suitable substitute prevents meaningful review of Appellant's challenges to the trial court's decision and evidentiary basis.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(f)(2) entitled Appellant to supplement the record by creating a substitute for a nonexistent trial transcript.
2. Whether the appellate court was required to allow Appellant, at a late stage of the appeal, to prepare and obtain approval of a statement of the evidence or proceedings under rule 9.200(b)(5).
3. Whether the judgment should be affirmed under Applegate because the absence of a transcript prevented review of Appellant's challenges.

Disposition

affirmed