SERGIO GONZALEZ v. WELLS FARGO BANK NA AS TRUSTEE UNDER POOLING AND (2011)

SERVICING AGREEMENT DATED AS OF FEBRUARY 1, 2005 ASSET–BACKED

PASS–THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2005–WHQ1, Appellee

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice Morris

In this forcible detainer action, Sergio Gonzalez challenges the trial court's judgment in favor of Wells Fargo Bank, NA as Trustee.   Gonzalez, representing himself without an attorney, contends the trial court erred in not granting him possession of the property based on the uncontroverted evidence at trial.   Because the issues in this appeal are settled in law and the facts are well known to the parties, we issue this memorandum opinion.   See Tex.R.App. P. 47.4. We affirm the trial court's judgment.

In his appellate brief, Gonzalez argues that Wells Fargo Bank did not controvert any of his evidence demonstrating that he had a superior right to immediate possession.   He also asserts the foreclosure sale at which Wells Fargo Bank purchased the property was invalid because Gonzalez was not given notice of his underlying default or of the foreclosure sale as required by sections 51.002(b), (d) and (e) of the Texas Property Code. We construe Gonzalez's complaints on appeal as challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court's judgment.

Our record on appeal consists of the clerk's record only.   We have received a letter from the court reporter indicating that there was no hearing on the record in the trial court and thus a reporter's record does not exist.   A party appealing an adverse judgment has the burden to show reversible error.   See Tex.R.App. P. 44.1(a).   Without a reporter's record, it is impossible for Gonzalez to prevail on his sufficiency challenges because we must presume the evidence supports the trial court's judgment.   See Sam Houston Hotel, L.P. v. Mockingbird Rest., Inc., 191 S.W.3d 720, 721 (Tex.App.—Hous. [14 th Dist.] 2006, no pet.).   Absent a reporter's record, our review is limited to complaints concerning errors of law, erroneous pleadings or rulings thereon, an erroneous jury charge, irreconcilable jury findings, summary judgment, and fundamental error.   See Krasniqi v. Dallas Cty. Child Protective Servs., 809 S.W.2d 927, 933 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991, writ denied).   Gonzalez has raised no such complaints in the present case.   And his evidentiary complaints without a reporter's record present nothing for our review.   Based on the record and arguments before us, we conclude Gonzalez has not demonstrated any reversible error in connection with his appeal.   We resolve Gonzalez's sole issue against him.

We affirm the trial court's judgment.

091322F.P05