Cote and Cote ( 2022 )

284
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion
pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited
except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
Submitted November 3, appeal dismissed December 14, 2022, petition for
review denied April 20, 2023 (371 Or 21)
In the Matter of the Marriage of
Violetta Alexander COTE,
nka Violetta Alexander,
Petitioner-Appellant,
and
Daniel O. COTE,
Respondent-Respondent.
Multnomah County Circuit Court
20DR10396; A178240
Diana I. Stuart, Senior Judge.
Violetta Alexander filed the briefs pro se.
Thomas A. Bittner, Amy D. Fassler, and Schulte, Anderson,
Downes, Aronson & Bittner, P.C., filed the brief for respondent.
Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Powers, Judge, and
Hellman, Judge.
ORTEGA, P. J.
Appeal dismissed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op: 323 Or App 284 (2022) 285
ORTEGA, P. J.
Wife appeals the trial court’s general judgment of
dissolution of marriage, challenging the trial court’s deter-
minations regarding child custody, parenting time, and
property division, among other things. She requests that we
exercise our discretion to review this de novo, as we have the
authority to under ORS 19.415(3)(b). However, wife has not
designated a sufficient record on review for us to determine
whether the court erred as she asserts. See ORS 19.365(5)
(“If the record on appeal is not sufficient to allow the appel-
late court to review an assignment of error, the appellate
court may decline to review the assignment of error and
may dismiss the appeal if there are no other assignments of
error that may be reviewed.”); Russell v. Nikon, Inc., 207 Or
App 266, 140 P3d 1179, adh’d to on recons, 208 Or App 606,
145 P3d 312 (2006), rev den, 342 Or 299 (2007) (dismissing
appeal under ORS 19.365(5) where appellant failed to pro-
vide an adequate record for review of his claim of error).
Appeal dismissed.