TOLIPOV v. BOJORQUE (2026)

Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not [sic] properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal. The trial court should have been affirmed because the record brought forward by the appellant is inadequate to demonstrate reversible error.”); Olivas v. Morales, 420 So. 3d 1091, 1091 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (“[The Father] contends that the trial court erred in not granting him exclusive timesharing during the summer break. However, the record on appeal does not include a transcript of the final hearing upon which the trial court based its factual findings and, ultimately, its final judgment. This failure is fatal to [the Father's] claim on appeal.”); Fla. Fam. L. R. P. 12.530(a) (“To preserve for appeal a challenge to the failure of the trial court to make required findings of fact in the final judgment, a party must raise that issue in a motion for rehearing under this rule.”); Olivas, 420 So. 3d at 1092 n.1 (“[T]he final judgment, and the final parenting plan approved by the trial court, fails to ‘[d]escribe in adequate detail the methods and technologies that the parents will use to communicate with the child,’ as required by 61.13(2)(b)4., Fla. Stat. (2025). However, the record fails to establish whether the issue was addressed in the trial court. Moreover, it was not preserved by a motion for rehearing ․ Venezia v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 306 So. 3d 1096, 1098 n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (observing that, generally, the failure to properly raise and preserve a claim in the trial court waives the issue on appeal) (citations omitted). We therefore do not reach the merits of this issue.”).

PER CURIAM.