DIOGO v. DIOGO (2019)

The Appellant, the former wife, seeks review of the trial court's finding that the prenuptial agreement at issue was valid and enforceable. She argues the trial court erred by admitting into evidence the testimony of the attorney who explained to her the prenuptial agreement before she signed it. She objected to the testimony based on the attorney client privilege. The trial court, however, repeatedly stated on the record the former wife had continually testified on a prior day that the lawyer did not represent her. He overruled the objection on this basis.

The former wife asserts that the trial court misremembers her testimony, but she has not provided a transcript of her testimony in this regard. “It is the responsibility and duty of the appellant to provide the appellate court with a record sufficient to review the matter assigned.” Shojaie v. Gables Court Prof'l Ctr., 974 So.2d 1140, 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (quoting Gleim v. Gleim, 176 So.2d 610, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)). In the absence of a complete record, we cannot meaningfully review the trial court's finding. As such, “in light of the inadequate record on appeal, we affirm the trial court's decision.” Shojaie, 974 So.2d at 1142; see Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979).

Affirmed.

LOGUE, J.