Opinion ID: 2359097
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Factual and Evidentiary Rulings

Text: [¶ 7] Husband's issues one, two, three, five, six and eight, question the propriety of the district court's factual and evidentiary determinations. For example, he claims there was insufficient evidence to support the district court's factual findings that he did not adequately support his family, committed domestic violence against Wife and wrote the letter in which Wife recanted her allegation of domestic violation, and Ms. Judd loaned the couple $140,000. He claims that by deciding in favor of Wife on many of the issues in the divorce proceeding, the judge demonstrated that he was biased against Husband. Husband also argues the district court erred in allowing some of Wife's evidence to be admitted while rejecting some of his evidence. [¶ 8] The problem with Husband's argument is that he did not provide a transcript of the trial or a statement of the evidence in accordance with W.R.A.P. 3.03. [2] When the appellant fails to provide an adequate record on appeal, `we must accept the district court's findings as being based upon sufficient evidence.' Painovich v. Painovich, 2009 WY 116, ¶ 9, 216 P.3d 501, 504 (Wyo.2009), quoting Witowski v. Roosevelt, 2009 WY 5, ¶ 37, 199 P.3d 1072, 1083 (Wyo. 2009). Our reasoning in Schluck v. Schluck, 2008 WY 92, ¶ 3, 189 P.3d 877, 878 (Wyo. 2008) is apt: 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. 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. 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. (citations and footnote omitted). [¶ 9] Because Husband failed to provide a transcript of the trial or provide a statement of the evidence under W.R.A.P. 3.03, we accept that the district court's findings were supported by sufficient evidence and its evidentiary rulings were not erroneous. Consequently, we summarily affirm the district court's rulings on those issues.