Quigley, E. v. Welch, M.

J-S54003-14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
ERIN QUIGLEY IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
MATTHEW WELCH
Appellant No. 83 MDA 2014
Appeal from the Judgment Entered December 27, 2013
In the Court of Common Pleas of Union County
Civil Division at No(s): CV-165-2012
BEFORE: LAZARUS, J., MUNDY, J., and STABILE, J.
JUDGMENT ORDER BY LAZARUS, J. FILED AUGUST 28, 2014
Matthew Welch appeals from the judgment entered in the Court of
Common Pleas of Union County in favor of Erin Quigley in the amount of
$202,653.92. Specifically, Welch appeals from the award of $100,000.00 in
compensatory damages, plus interest, for harm Quigley sustained when
Welch threated and assaulted Quigley in her home. Welch does not appeal
from the portion of the judgment consisting of an award of $100,000.00 in
punitive damages. For the reasons set forth below, we dismiss the appeal.
Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1911(a) requires an
appellant to request and pay for transcripts of proceedings. Such transcripts
the duty of the appellant, not the trial court, to provide an adequate certified
J-S54003-14
record for appellate review. Smith v. Smith, 637 A.2d 622 (Pa. Super.
1993).
The notice of appeal in the certified record of the instant matter is not
accompanied by a request for transcript of the October 23, 2013 non-jury
trial on damages. Moreover, the record in this case does not include a
transcript of the trial. Where an appellant fails to comply with the
Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Pennsylvania Rules of
Judicial Administration for preparation of the transcript, dismissal of the
appeal may be appropriate. See Pa.R.A.P. 1911(d).
on to
Smith, supra
Commonwealth v. Preston, 904 A.2d 1, 7 (Pa. Super. 2006) (en banc).
See also In the Interest of R.N.F., 52 A.3d 361 (Pa. Super. 2012) (appeal
dismissed where lack of transcript precluded meaningful appellate review).
Because the record does not include a transcript of the trial, we are
unable to engage in meaningful appellate review, and thus are constrained
Appeal dismissed.
-2-
J-S54003-14
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 8/28/2014
-3-