Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

596 So. 2d 1

Smith v. Smith

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 24, 1992

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1992-01-24

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Where all the evidence is not in the record, it will be presumed that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict or judgment.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Vaughan v. Oliver

Relies on 479 So. 2d 1250 - Berryhill v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. · 395 So. 2d 8 - Prestwood v. Prestwood

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1992-01-24

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently September 2017

10 state decisions

60199220002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1

¶2On May 24, 1982, James L. Smith was appointed guardian of Lori Lea Smith, then age 12. On August 16, 1989, on a motion filed by Lori Lea for an accounting and final settlement of the affairs of the guardianship, the Probate Court of St. Clair County entered a judgment against James L. Smith and in favor of Lori Lea in the amount of $80,254.48. James appealed that judgment to the Circuit Court of St. Clair County, pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 12-22-20. The circuit court affirmed the judgment, and James then appealed to this Court.

¶3Two issues have been presented for our review: 1) whether James Smith was entitled to a trial de novo, with a jury, in the circuit court and 2) whether the circuit court erred to reversal in affirming the probate court's judgment.

¶4With regard to the first issue, this Court specifically held in Prestwood v. Prestwood, 395 So.2d 8 (Ala. 1981), that §12-22-20, which provides that the judgment of a probate court may be reviewed on appeal by a circuit court, does not allow a trial de novo, with a jury, in the circuit court. As to the second issue, we note that the record contains none of the evidence presented to the probate court. The record indicates that this evidence was certified to the circuit court and that the circuit court "reviewed the file of the probate court," as well as the probate court's judgment, prior to rendering its decision. This Court is bound by the record, and if the record does not contain the evidence considered in the circuit court, this Court has no basis upon which it can review the circuit court's judgment. Consequently, because the evidence relied on by Smith in support of his argument is not before us for review, we will presume that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the judgment against him. See Berryhill v. Mutual ofOmaha Insurance Co., 479 So.2d 1250 (Ala. 1985). *2

¶5For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is affirmed.

¶6AFFIRMED.

¶7HORNSBY, C.J., and MADDOX, SHORES and KENNEDY, JJ., concur.

/596/so2d/1 · .json · Public domain