Case Title: Roxanne Alley v. John Alley

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: maine

Court: Maine Supreme Court

Date: 2002-10-31T00:00:00Z

Document:
Roxanne Alley v. John Alley  Download PDF MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Decision: 2002 ME 162 Docket: Ken-02-132 Submitted on Briefs: September 26, 2002 Decided: October 31, 2002 Panel: Reporter of Decisions SAUFLEY, C.J., and CLIFFORD, RUDMAN, DANA, CALKINS, and LEVY, JJ. ROXANNE ALLEY v. JOHN ALLEY DANA, J. [¶1] Roxanne Alley appeals from the divorce judgment entered in the Superior Court (Kennebec County, Worth, J.) dividing the Alleys property. Roxanne has challenged the court s factual findings, arguing that the judge misunderstood the evidence or believed a party who should not have been believed. When a person appeals from a judgment and challenges the factual findings of the judge, the appealing person must provide the Law Court with a transcript of the trial testimony in order to allow us to undertake an appellate review of the judge s findings. In this case, Roxanne argues in her reply brief that this Court s denial of John s motion to dismiss prevents us from affirming the judgment on the same grounds raised in his motion, that is, lack of a transcript. However, we generally do not dismiss appeals on this ground. Rather, if it 2 becomes obvious after giving the parties an opportunity to brief the issues, that a transcript is required for the particular issues on appeal, we then affirm the trial court. [¶2] Because Roxanne has not provided us with a transcript of the proceedings before the trial court or a statement of the evidence pursuant to M.R. App. P. 5(d), we must assume that there was sufficient evidence to support the court s factual findings. See Putnam v. Albee, 1999 ME 44, ¶ 10, 726 A.2d 217, 220. The entry is: Judgment affirmed. For plaintiff: Roxanne Alley 85 Woodbridge Drive Manchester, ME 04351 Attorney for defendant: Brian P. Winchester, Esq. 116 State Street Augusta, ME 04330