Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

973 So. 2d 529

Docket No. 1D06-3426.

Rose v. Clements

Bobby B. ROSE and Maudeanna Rose, Appellants, v. James CLEMENTS, individually, and Florida Family Insurance Company, Appellees.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 26, 2007.

Rehearing Denied January 31, 2008.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2007-12-26

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently May 2018

6 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Any basis for reversal of summary judgment must be preserved by raising the issue in the trial court.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including THOMAS E. JOHNSON AND KELI N. JOHNSON v. DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY

Relies on 377 So. 2d 1150 - Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee · 423 So. 2d 452 - Starks v. Starks · 785 So. 2d 562 - Klette v. Klette

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2007-12-26

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*530 Sean C. Barber and W. Alan Winter of The Winter Law Firm, Neptune Beach, for Appellants.

¶2Michael S. O'Neal of Howell & O'Neal, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellee Florida Family Insurance Company. No appearance for Appellee James Clements.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4Appellants challenge the trial court's final order entered after granting Florida Family Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment and dismissing Florida Family Insurance Company from the underlying case. Any basis for reversal of summary judgment must be preserved by raising the issue in the trial court. Cassady v. Moore,737 So.2d 1174, 1178 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Yzaguirre v. Progressive Am. Ins. Co.,793 So.2d 99, n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). After discovering that the record on appeal did not contain a transcript of the summary judgment hearing, this court issued an order directing Appellants to supplement the record pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(f)(2) with this information. Appellants did not file a transcript or a reconstructed record in response to this order. Due to the insufficient record, this court is unable to determine on what basis, if any, Appellants argued against the motion for summary judgment because the hearing on this motion was not recorded. Thus, this court is unable to review the factual or legal basis for the trial court's decision. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee,377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979); Klette v. Klette,785 So.2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Rollins v. Rollins,783 So.2d 1114, 1115 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); M.J. v. A.B.,694 So.2d 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). "Litigants who proceed . . . without a court reporter take a calculated risk. If the facts are determined adversely they may well be unable to demonstrate error on appeal due to the absence of a record." Starks v. Starks,423 So.2d 452, 454 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Accordingly, we AFFIRM the trial court's order on appeal.

¶5BROWNING, C.J., BARFIELD, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

/973/so2d/529 · .json · Public domain