Court Opinion

ID: 9365907
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-25 16:03:04.235895+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:48.273632
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                       Opinion filed January 25, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                             No. 3D21-1896
                       Lower Tribunal No. 19-23892
                          ________________

                         Pablo A. Hernandez,
                                  Appellant,

                                     vs.

                             Vicky R. Vidal,
                                  Appellee.

     An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ivonne
Cuesta, Judge.

     Kevin Coyle Colbert, for appellant.

      Sandy T. Fox, P.A., and Alisha B. Savani, and Sandy T. Fox, for
appellee.

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY, and BOKOR, JJ.

     PER CURIAM.
      Appellant Pablo A. Hernandez appeals from a final judgment of

dissolution of marriage between himself and Vicky R. Vidal.

      The final dissolution must be partially remanded to the trial court given

the parties’ agreement on two points. First, the parties have agreed that the

case should be partially remanded to fix scrivener’s errors regarding a

percentage split of the marital assets. Second, the parties have conceded

that the case should be partially remanded for a recalculation of Mr.

Hernandez’s net income, to determine the amount of Ms. Vidal’s permanent

alimony.

      However, this Court cannot address the remaining points on appeal

without a complete transcript of the trial.

      The findings of a trial court come to an appellate court clothed with a

presumption of correctness. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377

So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979):

      Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can
      not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to
      conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the
      evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual
      context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that
      the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal.
      The trial court should have been affirmed because the record
      brought forward by the appellant is inadequate to demonstrate
      reversible error.

                                       2
      The Appellant has only given this Court a partial transcript of the trial

held on July 7, 2021, and accordingly, this Court does not find that the record

is adequate to support reversible error.

      We remand to the trial court as to the parties’ partial confession of error

and otherwise affirm the trial court’s decision.

      Partially reversed and remanded with instructions.

                                       3