Hildebrand v. Dumas

----ooOoo----

Mark Hildebrand,
Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

Shane Dumas,
Defendant and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)

Case No. 20000409-CA

F I L E D
November 16, 2000 2000 UT App 326 -----

Third District, Murray Department
The Honorable Michael K. Burton

Attorneys:
Shane Dumas, Salt Lake City, Appellant Pro Se
Ronald C. Barker, Salt Lake City, for Appellee

-----

Before Judges Greenwood, Billings, and Orme.

PER CURIAM:

Dumas asks us to overturn the judgment entered in favor of Hildebrand for back rent, damages, and attorney fees, but does not provide an adequate record on appeal. See Call v. City of West Jordan, 788 P.2d 1049, 1052 (Utah Ct. App. 1990) (stating "appellant has the burden of providing the reviewing court with an adequate record on appeal to prove his allegations"). In particular, Dumas has not provided us with a transcript of the trial court proceedings. Without an adequate record, we must assume there was a proper legal and factual basis for the trial court's decision. See State v. Rawlings, 829 P.2d 150, 152-53 (Utah Ct. App. 1992) (upholding trial court's order because "[i]n the absence of an adequate record on appeal, we cannot address the issues raised and presume the correctness of the disposition made by the trial court").

Moreover, the trial court concluded that the evidence presented by Hildebrand was credible and we defer to that determination. See D'Aston v. Aston, 844 P.2d 345, 355 (Utah Ct. App. 1992) (stating appellate court defers to trial court's assessments on credibility and demeanor).

The trial court is affirmed.
 
 
 
 

______________________________
Pamela T. Greenwood,
Presiding Judge
 
 
 
 

______________________________
Judith M. Billings, Judge
 
 
 
 

______________________________
Gregory K. Orme, Judge