Hoover v. Sprecher, 91-2250

• Decision Date: 16 December 1992
• Docket Number: No. 91-2250,91-2250
• Parties: 18 Fla. L. Week. D32 Tamre G. HOOVER, f/k/a Tamre G. Sprecher, Appellant, v. Neal Barry SPRECHER, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 99

610 So.2d 99

18 Fla. L. Week. D32

Tamre G. HOOVER, f/k/a Tamre G. Sprecher, Appellant, v. Neal Barry SPRECHER, Appellee.

No. 91-2250.

District Court of Appeal of Florida,

First District.

Dec. 16, 1992.

Patricia L. Strowbridge, of Patricia L. Strowbridge, P.A., Orlando, for appellant.

John F. Kattman, of Kattman, Eshelman & MacLennan, P.A., Jacksonville, for appellee.

SHIVERS, Judge.

The former Wife appealed the orders of the trial court denying her request for an award of attorney's fees and costs. The standard of review of an order denying attorney's fees is whether the trial court abused its discretion. Lord v. Lord, 566 So.2d 35 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Deakyne v. Deakyne, 460 So.2d 582 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Because of the lack of an adequate record to review, we have no basis on which to find that the lower tribunal abused its discretion in denying Appellant's motions for attorney's fees. Chamberlain v. Chamberlain, 588 So.2d 20, 22 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Starks v. Starks, 423 So.2d 452 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Accordingly, we affirm.

An evidentiary hearing was conducted on December 12, 1990, and was continued on March 20, 1991. No transcript was made of either hearing. In its Order On All Pending Motions, filed on April 1, 1991, the trial court increased the amount of child support to be paid to the former Wife by Appellee, the former Husband. Appellant's request for attorney's fees was denied. Appellant moved for rehearing on several issues, including attorney's fees. No court reporter was present at the resulting hearing held on May 28, 1991. In its Order On Former Wife's Motion For Rehearing, filed on June 17, 1991, the trial court recalculated the amount due for child support but denied the former Wife's motion in all other respects, including the request for attorney's fees.

Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979), stands for the well-established proposition that "[i]n appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error." In that cause, as in the case sub judice, we, as the reviewing court, lacked the benefit of a trial transcript or a proper substitute. Reviewing our decision, which had reversed the trial court's imposition of a constructive trust, the Florida Supreme Court stated that the trial court's decision should have been affirmed because the record provided by the appellant was "inadequate to demonstrate reversible error." Id. Cf. Holmes v. Holmes, 578 So.2d 323 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (despite absence of a transcript or a stipulated or reconstructed record, appellate court reversed a "facially erroneous" dissolution judgment).

We are faced with the...