Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 10A04-1512-SC-2276 | June 30, 2016 Page 1 of 5

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), 

this Memorandum Decision shall not be 

regarded as precedent or cited before any 

court except for the purpose of establishing 

the defense of res judicata, collateral 

estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

William Perry McCall

Mosley Bertrand & McCall

Jeffersonville, Indiana

IN THE

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Pinnacle Properties 

Development Group, LLC,

Appellant-Plaintiff,

v.

Raul Sanchez,

Appellee-Defendant.

June 30, 2016

Court of Appeals Case No.

10A04-1512-SC-2276

Appeal from the Clark Circuit 

Court

The Honorable Kenneth R. 

Abbott, Magistrate

Trial Court Cause No.

10C03-1509-SC-1489

Riley, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 10A04-1512-SC-2276 | June 30, 2016 Page 2 of 5

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

[1] Appellant-Plaintiff, Pinnacle Properties Development Group, LLC (Pinnacle 

Properties), appeals the small claims court’s judgment, denying Pinnacle 

Properties’ claim for unpaid rent and eviction against Appellee-Defendant, Raul 

Sanchez (Sanchez). 

[2] We dismiss.

ISSUES

[3] Pinnacle Properties raises two issues, which we restate as follows:

(1) Whether the small claims court abused its discretion when it failed to 

apply the terms of the residential lease agreement; and 

(2) Whether the small claims court committed a reversible error when it did 

not allow Pinnacle Properties to submit additional testimony after the 

court conducted a viewing of the residence. 

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

[4] On September 21, 2015, Pinnacle Properties filed its Complaint and request for 

eviction against Sanchez for unpaid rent in the months of August, September, 

and October 2015. Apparently, “[o]n or about June 12, 2015, there was a 

substantial rainfall in the local area which caused substantial flooding in the 

area, and [Sanchez’] apartment in particular[.]” (Appellant’s Br. p. 10). As a 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 10A04-1512-SC-2276 | June 30, 2016 Page 3 of 5

result of the flooding, Sanchez “was unable to live in the apartment for a 

substantial period of time.” (Appellant’s Br. p. 10). On October 13, 2015, the 

small claims court conducted a hearing on Pinnacle Properties’ Complaint. 

After hearing the parties, the small claims court suspended the hearing to 

conduct an onsite visit of the apartment. The following day, the small claims 

court issued its Order, finding:

Despite [Pinnacle Properties’] testimony that the apartment was 

repaired and made habitable within a short period of time, and 

other testimony that it was repaired within 90 days, the [c]ourt’s 

physical viewing of the apartment revealed substantial amounts 

of mold on the walls, a large area of drywall missing in one 

room, as well as a large section of the ceiling missing in the 

bathroom. In addition, claims of the carpeting being removed 

and remedial work being done seem highly unlikely due to the 

filthy condition of the carpeting and the amount of debris found 

on the carpeting.

(Appellant’s Br. p. 10). The small claims court concluded that “[t]he leased 

premise has been uninhabitable since the flooding in July, and [Sanchez] had a 

legal right to reside elsewhere and pay no rent for the months of August, 

September, and October.” (Appellant’s Br. p. 10).

[5] Pinnacle Properties now appeals. Additional facts will be provided as 

necessary. 

DISCUSSION AND DECISION

[6] Although we prefer to dispose of cases on their merits, where an appellant fails 

to substantially comply with the appellate rules, then dismissal of the appeal is 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 10A04-1512-SC-2276 | June 30, 2016 Page 4 of 5

warranted. Hughes v. King, 808 N.E.2d 146, 147 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). Indiana 

Appellate Rule 49(A) provides in part that “[t]he appellant shall file its 

Appendix with its appellant’s brief.” (Emphasis added). And Indiana 

Appellant Rule 50(A) states, in relevant part:

(1) Purpose. The purpose of an Appendix in civil appeals . . . is 

to present the Court with copies of only those parts of the 

record on appeal that are necessary for the Court to decide 

the issues presented.

(2) Contents of Appellant’s Appendix. The appellant’s Appendix 

shall contain a table of contents and copies of the following 

documents, if they exist:

(a) The chronological case summary for the trial court . . . ;

* * * *

(f) pleadings and other documents from the Clerk’s Record in 

chronological order that are necessary for resolution of the 

issues raised on appeal[.]

[7] Here, in its appellant’s brief, Pinnacle Properties included the small claim 

court’s appealed judgment. However, Pinnacle Properties did not file an 

Appendix. Accordingly, we do not have the small claims court’s chronological 

case summary, nor do we have a copy of the Complaint or the residential lease 

agreement, despite numerous references to these documents in Pinnacle 

Properties’ appellate brief. 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 10A04-1512-SC-2276 | June 30, 2016 Page 5 of 5

[8] It is well settled that the duty of presenting a record adequate for intelligent 

appellate review on points assigned as error falls upon the appellant. Bambi’s 

Roofing, Inc. v. Moriarty, 859 N.E.2d 347, 352 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). Pinnacle 

Properties’ disregard for the requirements of the appellate rules makes our

review of the small claim court’s judgment impossible. Accordingly, we 

dismiss this appeal. 

CONCLUSION

[9] Based on the foregoing, we dismiss Pinnacle Properties’ appeal.

[10] Dismissed.

[11] Kirsch, J. and Pyle, J. concur