Title: PATRICK TERRANCE SCHLUCK V. DIANE PATRICIA SCHLUCK

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

PATRICK TERRANCE SCHLUCK V. DIANE PATRICIA SCHLUCK2008 WY 92189 P.3d 877Case Number: S-07-0286Decided: 08/14/2008
APRIL 
TERM, A.D. 2008

 
 
PATRICK 
TERRANCE SCHLUCK,Appellant(Defendant),v.DIANE 
PATRICIA SCHLUCK,Appellee(Plaintiff).

 
 
Appeal 
from the DistrictCourtofLaramieCounty

The 
Honorable Thomas T.C. Campbell, Judge

 
 

Representing 
Appellant:

Raymond 
D. Macchia and Juliana Hernandez of Macchia & Associates, Cheyenne, Wyoming

 
 

Representing 
Appellee:

Mitchell 
E. Osborn, Cheyenne, 
Wyoming

 
 
Before 
VOIGT, C.J., and GOLDEN, HILL, KITE, BURKE, JJ.

 
 

GOLDEN, 
Justice.

 
 
[¶1]      Patrick Terrance 
Schluck (Husband) and Diane Patricia Schluck (Wife) were divorced on July 25, 
1997.  Pertinent to this appeal, the 
decree of divorce included this provision:

 
 
[Husband] 
shall pay alimony to [Wife] in the sum of Eight Hundred Dollars ($800.00) per 
month.  Said payments shall be made 
by direct payment from the Office of Personnel Management to any bank account 
designated by [Wife].  Said payments 
shall begin on July 15, 1997, and shall continue on or before the 15th of each and every month thereafter until 
[Wife] dies, re-marries, or until [Husband] dies, at which time [Husband's] 
alimony obligation herein shall cease entirely.  This payment shall be paid directly from 
[Husband's] retirement annuity from the Office of Personal [sic] 
Management.  

 
 
[¶2]      On April 23, 
2007, Husband, citing a material change in circumstances, sought to modify or 
terminate the alimony obligation.1  After a trial, the district court denied 
Husband's request.  In this appeal, 
Husband contends the district court abused its discretion in determining there 
was not a substantial change in circumstances warranting modification or 
termination of his alimony obligation.2

 
 
[¶3]      We reject 
Husband's contention of error for the simple reason that Husband has failed to 
provide this Court with an adequate record to permit rational review of the 
district court's decision.  Erhart v. Evans, 2001 WY 79, ¶ 18, 30 P.3d 542, 547 (Wyo. 2001) (it is the appellant's burden to provide this Court 
with an adequate record).  The 
record presented for our review consists only of the pleadings filed by the 
parties, the district court's decision letter and its order.  Husband has not provided a transcript of 
the trial, nor has he submitted a statement of the evidence pursuant to W.R.A.P. 
3.03.3  Lacking a properly authenticated 
transcript, or an appropriate substitute for the transcript, the reliability of 
the district court's decision and the competency of the evidence upon which that 
decision is based must be presumed.  
Lopez v. Lopez, 2005 WY 88, ¶ 
7, 116 P.3d 1098, 1100 (Wyo. 2005); Burt 
v. Burt, 2002 WY 127, ¶ 7, 53 P.3d 101, 103 (Wyo. 2002).  Given the facts as found in the Order, 
we find no suggestion that the district court abused its discretion.4  Affirmed.

 
 
FOOTNOTES

 
 

1Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-116 
(LexisNexis 2007) provides that after a decree for alimony is entered, the court 
may, on the petition of either party, revise or alter the decree respecting the 
amount of alimony.  This Court has 
held that a party seeking modification or termination of alimony must establish 
that there has been a material and substantial change of circumstances since the 
entry of the decree.  Maher v. Maher, 2004 WY 62, ¶ 9, 90 P.3d 739, 743 (Wyo. 2004) (and cases cited therein).

 
 

2A district 
court's decision concerning alimony is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.  Harshberger v. Harshberger, 2005 WY 99, 
¶ 5, 117 P.3d 1244, 1248-49 (Wyo. 2005).

 
 

3W.R.A.P. 
3.03 states:

 
 
If no report 
of the evidence or proceedings at a hearing or trial was made, or if a 
transcript is unavailable, appellant may prepare a statement of the evidence or 
proceedings from the best available means including appellant's 
recollection.  The statement shall 
be filed and served on Appellee within 35 days of the filing of the notice of 
appeal.  Appellee may file and serve 
objections or propose amendments within 15 days after service.  The trial court shall, within 10 days, 
enter its order settling and approving the statement of evidence, which shall be 
included by the clerk of the trial court in the record on 
appeal.

 
 

4Husband's 
appellate argument is based on a mischaracterization of the facts found by the 
district court.  As such, the 
entirety of his argument is inapt and requires no further 
analysis.