Case Title: NORTHERN MILL AND LUMBER COMPANY INC. v. Maynard

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: maine

Court: Maine Supreme Court

Date: 1980-03-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
NORTHERN MILL AND LUMBER COMPANY INC. v. Maynard  412 A.2d 384 (1980) NORTHERN MILL AND LUMBER COMPANY, INC. v. Donald MAYNARD, Jr. Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. March 19, 1980. Jordan & Goodridge, Donald H. Goodridge (orally), Houlton, for plaintiff. Flora & Canders, P.A., Gilman N. Gauvin, Stephen A. Canders (orally), Presque Isle, for defendant. Before McKUSICK, C. J., and GODFREY, NICHOLS, GLASSMAN and ROBERTS, JJ. McKUSICK, Chief Justice. Plaintiff brought suit against defendant in the District Court for $1,190.56, and trial was held on September 11, 1978, without an electronic recording of the proceeding being made. The District Court judge rendered judgment for plaintiff and, within his discretion in the absence of such a recording, D.C.Civ.R. 52(a), denied defendant's motion for findings of fact and conclusions of law. Defendant thereupon appealed to the Superior Court where he sought to include the trial judge's handwritten notes of the trial in the record on appeal. The Superior Court, after ruling that the judge's notes *385 would not be a proper part of the record, denied defendant's appeal on the ground of an inadequate record for purposes of reviewing the District Court decisions. We affirm the Superior Court's ruling. There is no provision in the District Court Civil Rules or, as far as we know, in the rules of procedure of any jurisdiction for a trial judge's personal notes to be part of the record on appeal, and defendant failed to present any other record for review. To make a record for appeal from District Court to Superior Court, a party must request electronic recording if such is not routine, D.C.Civ.R. 76(a). If no recording or transcript is obtained through no fault of appellant, he may prepare a statement of the evidence to serve as the appellate record, D.C.Civ.R. 75(c).[1] If, as here, the appellant deliberately foregoes electronic recording, then the parties may prepare and sign an agreed statement of the case, certified by the District Court judge, pursuant to D.C.Civ.R. 75(d).[2] Having failed to employ the methods available for presenting an adequate record for review for the Superior Court, defendant's appeal was properly denied. The entry therefore is: Appeal denied. Judgment affirmed. WERNICK, J., did not sit.