# Appeals

Why bring a court reporter to an evidentiary hearing?
Click the card to flip 👆
1 / 49
Terms in this set (49)
W was granted temporary injunction against H. Parties reached settlement on visitation during pending dissolution, w dismissal of injunction as part of settlement. Stalking incident occurred. W filed motion for injunction. Court denied, saying injunction had been resolved as part of settlement. Does this constitute error the face of the judgment even without a transcript of injunction hearing?
--getting agreed-upon statement is unlikely bc no incentive on prevailing party unlikely to agree- Rivera (Fla 4th 2004).
--trial court cannot be expected to remember what occurred at trial well enough to approve statement-id.
--trial judge unlikely to approve a unilateral statement by non-prevailing party, much less able to add details. Kriebel (Fla 4th 2017).
--appellate court likely to just affirm order under review if statement not sufficiently detailed. Bei (Fla 2nd 1985).
H tried to offer evidence of the value of a townhouse at trial through testimony of realtor. W objected bc realtor was not expert. Only testimony was from husband, who simply submitted a value in financial affidavit. W's affidavit valued townhouse at substantially lower value. Trial court assigned H's value in final judgment. Was competent, substantial evidence, as required, submitted to support this valuation?
Competent, substantial evidence is required. An owner of property is generally qualified to testify about the value of his own property. Beaty (Fla 2nd 1995). But the record in this case does not contain competent, substantial evidence adequate to choose H's valuation over W's, so finding on value is reversed and evidentiary hearing on remand ordered.
W appeals an order by the trial court, contending that the court miscalculated the amount she should receive when an account was divided. The only evidence presented to the trial court concerning the account were unsworn pleadings and attachments at a non-evidentiary hearing on discovery issues and the arguments of H's counsel. Was there competent, substantial evidence for theatrical court's decision?
--failing to introduce documents and get them admitted into evidence at trial. Matson (Fla. 1st 1989).
--failing to identify and mark each exhibit and refer to it by letter/number in eliciting testimony so as to be entirely clear as to what is being discussed.
--failing to introduce and get admitted financial affidavits at trial. Reading from an affidavit is insufficient and does not constitute evidence. Jones (Fla. 5th 1996).