In re Guardianship of Wiggins
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as In re Guardianship of Wiggins, 2010-Ohio-3998.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 93350 IN RE: GUARDIANSHIP OF KAMAR WIGGINS JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED Civil Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Probate Division Case No. 2009GDN0145539 BEFORE: Jones, J., McMonagle, P.J., and Dyke, J. RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: August 26, 2010 FOR APPELLANT Latasha Stevens, Pro se 7240 Duxbury Court Oakwood Village, Ohio 44146 FOR APPELLEE Lamar Arnold, Pro se 17276 Libby Road Maple Hts., Ohio 44137 LARRY A. JONES, J.: {¶ 1} Appellant Latasha Wiggins ( Wiggins ) 1 appeals the trial court s judgment granting guardianship of Kamar Wiggins ( Kamar ) to Lamar Arnold ( Arnold ). Finding no merit to the appeal, we affirm. {¶ 2} In March 2009, Kamar s mother died. Wiggins, Kamar s maternal aunt, took the child to live with her. Wiggins and Arnold, Kamar s maternal grandfather, subsequently filed separate petitions in probate court for guardianship over Kamar. The court held a hearing on the petitions, accepting testimony from several witnesses appearing on behalf of Wiggins and two county social workers who had been involved with the family. 1 The record reflects that Wiggins legally changed her surname to Stevens in 2007. She applied for guardianship, however, using the name Wiggins. {¶ 3} After the hearing, the trial court issued a decision denying Wiggins s application for guardianship and granting Arnold s petition. The court ordered Wiggins to turn the child over to Arnold at the next family visit. {¶ 4} Wiggins filed a timely pro se notice of appeal. Although her appellant s brief does not comply with appellate rules, we are able to easily glean from her narrative argument that she feels the trial court erred in denying her petition for guardianship. {¶ 5} We are unable to review the merits of her claims, however, because Wiggins failed to file a transcript of the hearing in probate court or a valid statement of the proceedings under App.R. 9(C). It is well established that the duty to provide a transcript for appellate review falls upon the appellant. Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories (1980), 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 400 N.E.2d 384. Absent a transcript of the proceedings, a court will presume regularity and the validity of the judgment of the trial court. Ostrander v. Parker-Fallis Insulation Co. (1972), 29 Ohio St.2d 72, 74, 278 N.E.2d 363. {¶ 6} Thus, without a transcript, we are unable to review the court s determination. Therefore, we must presume the validity of the trial court proceedings and affirm the trial court s judgment. This decision, however, does not preclude Wiggins from filing a motion with the trial court for visitation with Kamar. {¶ 7} Accordingly, judgment is affirmed. It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed. It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said court to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. LARRY A. JONES, JUDGE CHRISTINE T. MCMONAGLE, P.J., and ANN DYKE, J., CONCUR
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
