IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

Assigned on Brief May 4, 2012

ALMOND REID v. NIGEL REID, SR.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Hamblen County

No. 11CV227TJW Tom Wright, Circuit Court Judge

No. E2011-02663-COA-R3-CV-FILED-AUGUST 9, 2012

This appeal involves a dispute between brothers. One brother owned an apartment complex

and leased one of the apartments to his brother. The tenant brother allegedly failed to pay

rent to the landlord brother. The landlord brother filed a forcible entry and detainer action

in general sessions court seeking possession of the property and a judgment for the unpaid

rent. The general sessions court entered a judgment in favor of the landlord brother. The

tenant brother appealed to circuit court. The circuit court conducted a trial de novo. After

the trial, the circuit court awarded the landlord brother possession of the property and a

judgment for the unpaid rent. The tenant brother now appeals. We affirm.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court is Affirmed

HOLLY M. KIRBY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ALAN E. HIGHERS, P.J.,

W.S., and J. STEVEN STAFFORD, J., joined.

Almond Reid, Plaintiff/Appellee, pro se, Central Islip, New York

1

Nigel Reid, Sr., Defendant/Appellant, pro se, Morristown, Tennessee

Some pleadings in the file list the apartment manager, Beverly LeDoux, as appearing or filing pleadings on 1

behalf of Plaintiff/Appellee Almond Reid. Ms. LeDoux is not a licensed Tennessee attorney and therefore

cannot appear or file pleadings on behalf of anyone else in a Tennessee court. See Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 7.

§1.01; Tenn. Code Ann. § 23-3-103 (2009). It appears that the essential pleadings were filed by Almond

Reid pro se, rather than by Ms. LeDoux, so we will consider the merits of the appeal. See Northcutt v.

Northcutt, NO. M2006-00295-COA-R3-CV, 2007 WL 3332851, at *3 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 8, 2007).
OPINION

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

Plaintiff/Appellee Almond Reid (“Landlord”) owns an apartment complex located in

Morristown, Tennessee. Landlord agreed to rent an apartment in the complex to his brother

Defendant/Appellant Nigel Reid, Sr. (“Tenant”). There is some indication in the record that

Tenant suffers from an unspecified disability, for which he receives disability benefits.

2

In September 2011, Landlord filed a forcible entry and detainer (F.E.D.) action in the

General Sessions Court of Hamblen County, Tennessee, to evict Tenant from the apartment,

seeking a judgment for unpaid rent and a writ of possession. After a trial, the General

Sessions Court awarded Landlord a judgment in the amount of $1400 and the requested writ

of possession.

Tenant appealed the decision of the General Sessions Court to the Circuit Court for the Third

Judicial District at Morristown, Tennessee, for a trial de novo. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 27-5-

108 (Supp. 2011). The trial was conducted on December 14, 2011, after which the Circuit

Court entered an order granting Landlord a judgment for unpaid rent in the amount of

$2,150, as well as a writ of possession for the property. Tenant now appeals.

ISSUES ON APPEAL AND STANDARD OF REVIEW

On appeal, Tenant argues that the trial court committed error in awarding Landlord a

judgment and a writ of possession for the property.

Ordinarily, the trial court’s findings of fact are presumed to be correct unless the

preponderance of the evidence in the record is otherwise. Tenn. R. App. P. 13(d)); Nashville

Ford Tractor, Inc. v. Great Am. Ins. Co., 194 S.W.3d 415, 424-25 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005).

In this case, however, we have neither a transcript of the proceedings nor a statement of the

evidence. See Tenn. R. App. P. 24 (2011). We have only what is commonly referred to as

the “technical record,” i.e., the parties’ pleadings and the orders of the trial court. Therefore,

the trial court’s factual findings cannot be reviewed, with a presumption of correctness or

In his pleadings filed with the trial court, Tenant did not explain his disability but contended that the dispute

2

with his brother regarding the apartment “has put me under a lot of stress that is very unbearable/is hard to

deal whitBUT Ithank God that GOD, HAS, Motavated ME, To, OPEN, My, C-W-U-R-C-H, T-H-A, C-H-UR-C-H. OF, THA, LIVEN. ROCK.: that his Blessing keeps me strong.:\\" Tenant’s appellate briefstates that

he has “a Mental Disability disease of Bipolarism. . . .” Landlord’s appellate brief contends that potential

tenants are fearful of his brother and are therefore unwilling to rent apartments in the complex, which leaves

Landlord in danger of losing the property to foreclosure.

-2-
otherwise, because the record on appeal contains no record of the evidence or even of the

trial court’s findings of fact. Taylor v. Allstate Ins. Co., 158 S.W.3d 929, 931 (Tenn. Ct.

App. 2005).

ANALYSIS

In his appellate brief, Tenant argues that he “can and will prove” various things related to his

dispute with Landlord, such as the details of his lease arrangement, whether Landlord treated

the premises for bedbugs, and the fact that child support is garnished from Tenant’s disability

income. The jurisdiction of this Court is appellate only; we cannot hear proof and decide the

merits of the parties’ allegations in the first instance. See Article VI, section 2 of the

Tennessee Constitution; Tenn. Code Ann. § 16-4-108(a)(1); Peck v. Tanner, 181 S.W.3d

262, 265-66 (Tenn. 2005). Therefore, we may only consider the record from the trial court.

The record presented in this case is sparse indeed. Ordinarily, in an appeal to this Court, the

parties provide the appellate court with a verbatim transcript of the trial court proceedings

or, in lieu of that, the parties prepare a statement of the evidence, approved by the trial court,

that summarizes the evidence presented at trial. See Tenn. R. App. P. 24. In this case, we

have neither; we have only the technical record. Moreover, because this case is an appeal

from an F.E.D. action in general sessions court, the pleadings are “bare bones” form

pleadings that contain minimal information.

This Court has appellate jurisdiction only; the Court’s power to review is limited to those

“factual and legal issues for which an adequate legal record has been preserved.” Trusty v.

Robinson, No. M2000-01590-COA-R3-CV, 2001 WL 96043, at *1; 2001 Tenn. App. LEXIS

75, at *4 (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2001) (citing Dorrier v. Dark, 537 S.W.2d 888, 890 (Tenn.

1976); Trollinger v. Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., No. 58, 1989 WL 22766, at *2; 1989

Tenn. App. LEXIS 179 (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 17, 1989)). Our authority to review a trial

court’s decision is limited to those issues for which an adequate legal record has been

preserved. Taylor v. Allstate Ins. Co., 158 S.W.3d 929, 931 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “The

duty to see to it that the record on appeal contains a fair, accurate, and complete account of

what transpired with respect to the issues being raised on appeal falls squarely on the

shoulders of the parties themselves, not the courts.” Trusty, 2001 WL 96043, at *1; 2001

Tenn. App. LEXIS 75, at *4 (citing Tenn. R. App. P. 24(b); Taylor, 158 S.W.3d at 931;

Realty Shop, Inc. v. RR Westminister Holding, Inc., 7 S.W.3d 581, 607 (Tenn. Ct. App.

1999); Nickas v. Capadalis, 954 S.W.2d 735, 742 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997)).

In his appellate brief, Tenant cites numerous facts not in the record and attaches documents

that have not been made part of the trial court record. “A recitation of facts and argument

in an appellate brief does not constitute evidence and cannot be considered in lieu of a

-3-
verbatim transcript or statement of th evidence and proceedings.” In re M.R., No. M2007-

02532-COA-R3-JV, 2008 WL 2331030, at *3 (Tenn. Ct. App. June 3, 2008). “The law is

clear that statements of fact made in or attached to pleadings [or] briefs . . . are not evidence

and may not be considered by an appellate court unless they are properly made part of the

record,” i.e., approved by the trial court. Threadgill v. Bd. of Pro’l Resp., 299 S.W.3d 792,

812 (Tenn. 2009).

Without a complete record or sufficient statement of the evidence from which to determine

whether the trial court acted appropriately, we “must assume the sufficiency of the evidence

to support the judgment.” Taylor, 108 S.W.3d at 931 (quoting Houston v. Mounger, No.

E2002-00779-COA-R3-CV, 2003 WL 22415363, at *2 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 23, 2003)).

Without an adequate record containing the facts of the case, this Court “must assume that the

record, had it been preserved, would have contained sufficient evidence to support the trial

court’s factual findings.” Id. (quoting Sherrod v. Wix, 849 S.W.2d 780, 784 (Tenn. Ct. App.

1992)). Tennessee courts have long held that “in the absence of a transcript or a statement

of the evidence, we must conclusively presume that every fact admissible under the pleadings

was found or should have been found in favor of the Appellee.” Britt, 2007 WL 177902, at

*3; 2007 Tenn. App. LEXIS 38, at *8 (citing Leek v. Powell, 884 S.W.2d 118, 121 (Tenn.

Ct. App. 1996); Lallemand v. Smith, 667 S.W.2d 85, 87-88 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1983)).

Therefore, under the circumstances, we are compelled to assume that the Circuit Court’s

decision in favor of Landlord was supported by the evidence submitted at trial. Accordingly,

we affirm the Circuit Court’s judgment against Tenant.

CONCLUSION

The decision of the trial court is affirmed. Costs on appeal are to be taxed to Appellant Nigel

Reid, Sr., for which execution may issue, if necessary.

_________________________________

HOLLY M. KIRBY, JUDGE

-4-