16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 513a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 166BEST
Insurance — Automobile — Appeals — Absence of transcript — Without transcript it is not possible to determine whether trial court erred by allowing insurer to bring court stenographer to trial — No abuse of discretion in allowing claims adjuster to testify and excluding from evidence letter informing insured that his premiums were paid up to date
WILLIAM BEST, Appellant, v. GEICO, Appellee. Circuit Court, 17th Judicial Circuit (Appellate) in and for Broward County. Case No. 08-15028 (02). March 23, 2009.
OPINION
(JOHN B. BOWMAN, J.) THIS CAUSE is before the Court on appeal from a final judgment rendered by the trial court on March 19, 2008, in favor of Appellee, Geico. The Court having reviewed the briefs filed by the parties, the court file, applicable law, and otherwise being fully advised in the premises finds and decides as follows:
Appellant, William Best (“Best”), owned an automobile which was insured by Geico for physical damage coverage. Best filed a claim with Geico for vandalism to his vehicle. Geico denied Best’s claim and determined that the damage was caused by normal wear and tear on the vehicle. Consequently, Best filed an action against Geico. A non-jury trial was held in the lower court, and judgment was entered in favor of Geico.
On appeal, Best argues that he was denied a fair trial because Geico brought a courtroom stenographer to the trial, Geico’s claims adjuster was allowed to testify, and the lower court excluded as evidence, a letter written to Best, stating that his insurance premiums were paid up to date.
The law is well settled that a judgment is subject to affirmance on appeal in absence of an adequate transcript or any record of proceedings, where appellant did not allege fundamental error and no such error appeared on the face of the appealed order. A.L. v. Department of Children and Families, 958 So.2d 606 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). Where a transcript of the testimony or other substitute is not supplied to the appellate court, the court must accept the factual findings in the judgment as being correct and assume they are supported by competent substantial evidence. Sibley v. Sibley, 815 So.2d 673 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2002) citing Beniaminov v. Beniaminov, 789 So.2d 494 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2001); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1979).
Without a trial transcript, it is not possible for this Court to determine whether the lower court erred by allowing Geico to bring a court stenographer to the trial.
Appellant further claims that his right to a fair trial was violated when the lower court allowed Geico’s claims adjuster to testify, and excluded from evidence a letter written to Appellant informing him that his premiums were paid up to date.
Decision of a trial court to admit or exclude evidence, after weighing the probative value of that evidence against its prejudicial impact, will not be overturned on appeal in absence of a clear abuse of discretion. Vicki Trees v. K-Mart Corporation, 467 So.2d 401 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). In this case, Appellant has failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1980).
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the trial court is affirmed.
