339 ORAPP 500 - Pirv v. Pirv

500                     April 2, 2025            No. 301

   This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion
    pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited
         except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

        IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE
                STATE OF OREGON

                        Florin PIRV,
                   Petitioner-Respondent,
                              v.
                        Rodica PIRV,
                   Respondent-Appellant.
              Multnomah County Circuit Court
                   23CN00470; A182268

  Susan M. Svetkey, Judge.
  Submitted February 4, 2025.
  Rodica Pirv filed the briefs pro se.
  Florin Pirv filed the brief pro se.
  Before Aoyagi, Presiding Judge, Egan, Judge, and Joyce,
Judge.
  JOYCE, J.
  Affirmed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op:

339 Or App 501

 (2025)                          501

          JOYCE, J.
         Wife appeals from a supplemental judgment awarding husband a $10,172 money award and holding her in
contempt for failing to comply with her obligations under
the general judgment dissolving the marriage. The general judgment awarded wife a specific portion of husband’s
monthly retirement benefits. The trial court found that
wife willfully disobeyed the judgment by retaining funds
exceeding that amount and ordered wife to repay husband
a specific amount. See ORS 33.015(2)(b) (defining “contempt
of court” as the willful “[d]isobedience of, resistance to or
obstruction of the court’s authority, process, orders or judgments”). In a single assignment of error, wife asserts that
the trial court erred in granting husband the money award
because the trial court miscalculated the amount that wife
owed to husband.
         Wife did not designate the transcript of the contempt hearing as part of the appellate record and that lack
of designation renders the record on appeal insufficient for
review. See ORS 19.365(5) (“If the record on appeal is not
sufficient to allow the appellate court to review an assignment of error, the appellate court may decline to review the
assignment of error ….”); see also Ferguson v. Nelson,

216 Or App 541, 549

174 P3d 620

 (2007) (the “appellant bears
the burden of providing a record sufficient to demonstrate
that error occurred”). The transcript here is necessary for
determining whether wife preserved her claim of error and
whether her claim has merit. Particularly with respect to
the latter point, without the transcript, we are unable to
meaningfully assess wife’s argument that the trial court
miscalculated the amount that she owed to husband.1 See
C. P. v. N. L.,

274 Or App 180, 181

359 P3d 1248

 (2015)
(concluding that “[i]n the absence of that transcript—that is,
without a complete record of the evidence presented to the
trial court—we are unable to determine whether the court
erred”). Accordingly, we affirm.
          Affirmed.
    1
      Although the parties submitted documents in support of their respective
arguments, we cannot discern from those documents alone whether the court
erred.