C.L. v. T.B. , 2019 Ohio 1864 ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as C.L. v. T.B., 
    2019-Ohio-1864
    .]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
    TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    [C.L.],                                             :
    Petitioner-Appellant,              :
    No. 18AP-887
    v.                                                  :                (C.P.C. No. 18DV-1663)
    [T.B.],                                             :        (ACCELERATED CALENDAR)
    Respondent-Appellee.               :
    D E C I S I O N
    Rendered on May 14, 2019
    On brief: C.L., pro se.
    APPEAL from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas
    Division of Domestic Relations, Juvenile Branch
    PER CURIAM.
    {¶ 1} Petitioner-appellant, C.L., appeals from the judgment of the Franklin County
    Court of Common Pleas, Division of Domestic Relations, Juvenile Branch that denied her
    petition for a civil protective order. Because the record contains no transcript of the hearing
    that the trial court held on C.L.'s petition, we must overrule her assignments of error and
    affirm the judgment of the trial court.
    {¶ 2} On October 15, 2018, C.L. filed a pro se petition seeking an ex parte domestic
    violence protection order against T.B under R.C. 3113.31(D). In the addendum to the
    petition, C.L. alleged that T.B. had threatened and physically assaulted their child and
    threatened her; she also alleged that the child's guardian ad litem had not acted after
    hearing recordings of threats T.B. had made, and that the guardian ad litem had falsified
    documents and perjured herself before the trial court. (Oct. 15, 2018 Petition.)
    {¶ 3} After a hearing, the trial court denied the petition. The trial court's entry
    stated: "Based upon testimony of Petitioner, the Court finds that the Petitioner has not
    No. 18AP-887                                                                                   2
    proven, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Respondent committed any of the acts
    necessary to support relief pursuant to Ohio Revised Code §3113.31." (Oct. 16, 2018 Entry.)
    {¶ 4} C.L. filed a timely notice of appeal. Under App.R. 16(A), an assignment of
    error must identify "the place in the record where each error is reflected." Although the
    assignments of error asserted by C.L. do not comply with this requirement, we construe
    them all as asserting that the trial court erred in its decision denying her petition for a civil
    protection order under R.C. 3113.31. See, e.g., State ex rel. Becker v. Ohio State Hwy.
    Patrol, 10th Dist. No. 02AP-918, 
    2003-Ohio-1450
    , ¶ 15 (construing various arguments as
    an assignment of error challenging an entry of judgment on the pleadings in the "interests
    of justice" where pro se appellant failed to conform to requirements of App.R. 16(A)). We
    have reviewed C.L.'s brief and its attachments (some going back a period of years).
    {¶ 5} "When granting a protection order [under R.C. 3113.31(D)], the trial court
    must find that petitioner has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that petitioner or
    petitioner's family or household members are in danger of domestic violence." Felton v.
    Felton, 
    79 Ohio St.3d 34
     (1997), paragraph two of the syllabus. Because a trial court may
    only issue an ex parte protection order under R.C. 3113.31(D) if a preponderance of the
    evidence demonstrates the danger of domestic violence, C.L. must point to evidence in the
    record that shows she met this burden in order to demonstrate that the trial court erred.
    {¶ 6} As with some of C.L.'s appeals previously to this court, however, she has not
    provided a transcript of the trial court's hearing on her petition. See, e.g., C.L. v. T.B., 10th
    Dist. No. 17AP-813, 
    2018-Ohio-1074
    , ¶ 7-8 ("C.L. had the responsibility to provide a
    transcript of the trial court proceedings because C.L. bears the burden of showing error by
    reference to matters in the record * * * the absence of a transcript prevents us from
    discerning whether C.L. introduced any evidence substantiating her claims"); In re C.B.,
    10th Dist. No. 17AP-142, 
    2017-Ohio-4413
    , ¶ 7 ("mother has failed to provide this court with
    an adequate record to determine the merits of her appeal as it pertains to the court's entry
    of February 14, 2017").
    {¶ 7} Our review of a trial court's decision to grant or deny a civil protection order
    is governed by an abuse of discretion standard. Parrish v. Parrish, 
    95 Ohio St.3d 1201
    , 1204
    (2002). If there is no transcript of the proceedings in the record, "there is no basis upon
    which this court can make any finding with respect to the evidence." Eble v. Emery, 10th
    No. 18AP-887                                                                                  3
    Dist. No. 06AP-1007, 
    2007-Ohio-4857
    , ¶ 9 (affirming the dismissal of a civil protection
    order where the appellant failed to "cause a transcript of the proceedings to be transmitted
    to this court"). Again, it is the obligation of an appellant to provide the appellate court with
    a transcript of the proceedings in the trial court. App.R. 9(B); C.L. v. T.B. at ¶ 7; Knapp v.
    Edwards Laboratories, 
    61 Ohio St.2d 197
    , 199 (1980). Without a transcript to review the
    proceedings before the trial court, an appellate court must "presume the validity of the
    lower court's proceedings, and affirm." Knapp at 199.
    {¶ 8} Without an adequate record, we are compelled to presume the regularity of
    the trial court's actions. We overrule the assignments of error, and affirm the judgment of
    the trial court.
    Judgment affirmed.
    KLATT, P.J., DORRIAN, J. and NELSON, J., concur.
    _________________
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18AP-887

Citation Numbers: 2019 Ohio 1864

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 5/14/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 5/14/2019