Background
Gertha Cadeau, representing herself, appealed a judgment of the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County in litigation against Sedanos Supermarket. Circuit Judge Spencer Eig presided over the lower-court case.
The appellate opinion does not describe the underlying claims, the evidence presented, or the specific judgment under review. The Third District indicated that it lacked a record of the trial proceedings needed to evaluate the factual issues raised by the appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s judgment. Relying on Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979), the court explained that a trial court’s decision is presumed correct and that the appellant bears the burden of demonstrating error.
Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court could not determine whether the judgment lacked evidentiary support or could be sustained on an alternative theory. Cadeau therefore failed to establish reversible error.
Key Takeaways
- A trial court’s judgment carries a presumption of correctness on appeal.
- The appellant bears the burden of supplying a record sufficient to demonstrate reversible error.
- When factual issues cannot be reviewed because the trial record is missing, the appellate court must affirm the judgment.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that an appeal cannot succeed merely by asserting that the trial court erred. Litigants, including those proceeding without counsel, must provide the appellate court with the portions of the record necessary to evaluate the challenged rulings.