ROLLINS v. ROLLINS (2001)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,First District.

Joseph James ROLLINS, Appellant, v. Donna Suzanne ROLLINS, Appellee.

No. 1D00-955.

Decided: March 14, 2001

Christopher P. Saxer, Fort Walton Beach, for Appellant. Michael A. Flowers, Niceville, for Appellee.

Appellant Joseph James Rollins appeals an order denying his supplemental petition for modification of alimony payments. No transcript of the hearing was provided because there was no court reporter present at the hearing. There was no statement of the evidence as permitted by Fla.R.App.P. 9.200(b)(4). Accordingly, appellate review is precluded and we are unable to ascertain whether the trial court erred. See Mead v. Mead, 726 So.2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Starks v. Starks, 423 So.2d 452, 454 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (“Litigants who proceed ․ without a court reporter take a calculated risk. If the facts are determined adversely they may well be unable to demonstrate error on appeal due to the absence of a record.”).

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM.

BENTON, PADOVANO and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network