Opinion
3D21-1781
11-16-2022
J&R United Industries, Inc., etc., Appellant, v. Stephen E. Miron, etc., Appellee.
Karen B. Parker, P.A., and Karen B. Parker, for appellant. Tobin & Reyes, P.A., and Adrian J. Alvarez (Boca Raton), for appellee.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County Lower Tribunal No. 11-27895 Mark Blumstein, Judge.
Karen B. Parker, P.A., and Karen B. Parker, for appellant.
Tobin & Reyes, P.A., and Adrian J. Alvarez (Boca Raton), for appellee.
Before EMAS, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ.
GORDO, J.
J&R United Industries, Inc. ("J&R") appeals a final judgment entered in favor of Stephen E. Miron, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Julie Miron ("Miron") following a non-jury trial. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A). Finding no demonstrable error in the trial court's conclusions of law, we affirm.
J&R challenges the trial court's findings of fact arguing they were either not supported by the record or the facts adduced at trial were insufficient as a matter of law for the trial court to have reached the legal conclusions contained in the judgment. J&R, however, has not provided this Court with an adequate record of the trial proceedings below.
Early in the proceedings, J&R filed a condensed transcript however, that transcript was stricken for failing to comply with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(4) and 9.220(c)(4). While given an opportunity to supplement the record, J&R did not file a conforming transcript.
"We cannot emphasize too strongly the fundamental principle of appellate review that 'a trial court's findings and judgment come to a reviewing court with a presumption of correctness, and cannot be disturbed absent a record demonstrating reversible error.'" Thurman v. Davis, 321 So.3d 341, 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (quoting JP Morgan Chase Bank v. Combee, 883 So.2d 330, 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)). "This case may or may not have had a failure of proof. However, it does suffer from the failure of a record, and that is the significant datum for decision purposes. As we have often said, '[w]here there is no record of the testimony of witnesses or of evidentiary rulings, and where a statement of the record has not been prepared pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(a)(3) or (b)[4], a judgment which is not fundamentally erroneous on its face must be affirmed.'" GMAC Mort., LLC v. Palenzuela, 208 So.3d 181, 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (quoting Zarate v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co., 81 So.3d 556, 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)). We find nothing fundamentally erroneous on the face of the order on appeal in this case.
Affirmed.