Mumma v. Cooper
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Mumma v. Cooper, 2003-Ohio-2507.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WASHINGTON COUNTY : : : Case No. 02CA11 Plaintiff-Appellee, : : vs. : : DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY PETER GEORGE COOPER, : : Released 5/14/03 Defendant-Appellant. : : ___________________________________________________________ APPEARANCES: ELLEN CONNIE MUMMA, Peter George Cooper, pro se.1 ___________________________________________________________ Harsha, J. {¶1} In this divorce action, Peter Cooper appeals the trial court's property characterization and distribution as well as its failure to award spousal support. Cooper argues the trial court marital erred in failing to award him portion of Ellen Mumma's retirement benefits. property and a Because Cooper has failed to provide a transcript of the trial court's hearing, we must afford the trial court's regularity and affirm it. 1 Appellee did not file a brief in this case. judgment a presumption of In 1987, a California court convicted Peter Cooper of {¶2} second-degree murder and sentenced him to life in prison. in prison, Cooper married Ellen Mumma in 1996. While Prior to the marriage, Mumma owned real estate solely in her name. However, after the marriage Mumma transferred the real estate into both their names. After the marriage Mumma also purchased additional real estate in the name of both parties. In 2001, Mumma filed for divorce. Following a hearing, the Washington County Court of {¶3} Common Pleas granted Mumma's request for a divorce, ordered that she receive all property, ordered that both parties retain their respective retirement or pension plans, and refused to award spousal support. Cooper transcript of all assignments of error filed this as required and Instead proceedings. appeal of by provides arguments to support his case. App.R. requested a delineating 16(A), Cooper Primarily, Cooper seems to argue the trial court erred in awarding all of the "marital property" to Mumma, in failing to grant him spousal support, and in failing to award him a portion of Mumma's retirement benefits. {¶4} Even though Cooper requested a transcript, the record transmitted to us did not include one. At Cooper's request, we granted a motion for extension of time so that he could arrange for the court reporter to prepare a transcript. In our entry, we instructed Cooper to pay the court reporter for preparation of the transcript. refused to Later, Cooper claimed the court reporter prepare a transcript attempted to pay for it. when his brother, Matthew, At this time, we instructed Cooper to provide a sworn affidavit from Matthew stating what happened. When Matthew supplied an "affidavit" that was not sworn before a person authorized to administer oaths, we instructed Cooper to have Matthew provide an affidavit sworn to before a public or other person authorized to administer oaths. did not provide a second affidavit. notary Cooper Thus, the court reporter did not provide a transcript. When {¶5} it is necessary to the disposition of any question on appeal, the appellant bears the burden of providing a transcript. Rose Chevrolet, Inc. v. Adams (1988), 36 Ohio St.3d 17, 19, 520 N.E.2d 564. we must presume regularity In the absence of a transcript, in the trial court proceedings. Hartt v. Munobe (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 3, 7, 615 N.E.2d 617; Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories (1980), 61 Ohio St.3d 197, 199, 400 N.E.2d 384. transcript in Cooper's arguments require us to examine the order to ascertain whether the trial court factually mischaracterized the property as marital or separate and abused its discretion in distributing the property as well as failing to award spousal support. Thus, Cooper's failure to provide a transcript is fatal to his appeal because we must presume the trial court acted properly in characterizing and distributing the property as well as refusing to award spousal support. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. JUDGMENT ENTRY It is ordered that the JUDGMENT BE AFFIRMED and that Appellee recover of Appellant costs herein taxed. The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Washington County Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution. Any stay previously granted by this Court is hereby terminated as of the date of this entry. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. Exceptions. Abele, J. & Kline, J.: Concur in Judgment and Opinion. For the Court BY: _______________________ William H. Harsha, Judge NOTICE TO COUNSEL Pursuant to Local Rule No. 14, this document constitutes a final judgment entry and the time period for further appeal commences from the date of filing with the clerk.
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.
