Chiemenam Amaechi v. Susan Babich ( 2011 )

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 30, 2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-10-00701-CV

Chiemenam Amaechi, Appellant

V.

Susan Babich, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 1

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 951819

MEMORANDUM  OPINION

Appellant Chiemenam Amaechi appeals from a judgment entered in County Court in an appeal from Small Claims Court.  In two issues appellant contends the evidence is insufficient to prove appellee’s claim of injury or the amount of damages.  We affirm.

Factual and Procedural Background

Appellee Susan Babich filed suit in Small Claims Court alleging that appellant damaged a motorcycle owned by her when appellant failed to stop for a red light and collided with the motorcycle.  On November 3, 2009, the Small Claims Court entered a default judgment in appellee’s favor in the amount of $10,000.  Appellant timely appealed to the County Court at Law.  See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 28.053.  On July 12, 2010, the County Court at Law entered judgment in favor of appellee in the amount of $10,000.  Appellant appeals the county court judgment. 

Analysis

In her brief, appellant challenges the county court’s judgment as follows:

1. The Appellant posits that Appellee is without direct experiential knowledge of collision event sufficient to form an opinion as to the truth or accuracy of the allegations contained in original claim and based on that denies, generally, the monetary claim contained herein and demands strict proof.

2. The Appellant generally denies legitimacy and sustainability of Appellee’s entire claim due to the excessive amount of time that has passed since the event.

3. The Appellant denies the Appellee’s account of described event as Appellee was not present during event.

4. The Appellant denies Appellee’s assertion that Appellant was an “unqualified and reckless” driver.

5. The Appellant generally denies full actions leading to the “proximate cause of . . . damages” to motorcycle.

Appellant failed to file a reporter’s record from the bench trial in county court.  Unless an appellant arranges for the filing of a complete reporter’s record (or partial reporter’s record and accompanying statement of issues),[1] we must presume that the proceedings support the trial court’s judgment.  See Bennett v. Cochran, 96 S.W.3d 227, 229 (Tex. 2002); Sam Houston Hotel, L.P. v. Mockingbird Restaurant, Inc., 191 S.W.3d 720, 721 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, no pet.).  On February 17, 2011, this court received correspondence from the official court reporter of County Civil Court at Law No. 1 in which she informed the court that no record was requested at the time of trial; therefore no record exists.  Appellant’s issues in this case require reference to the evidence and testimony that was admitted at trial.  Because we have no record of what that evidence consisted of, we have no basis to review the trial court’s decisions based on that evidence.

Because appellant did not object to the failure of the court reporter to make a record, her issues challenging the trial court’s decisions based on the proceedings at trial afford no basis for relief.  See Electronic Bankcard Sys., Inc. v. Retriever Indus., Inc., No. 04-00452-CV, 2005 WL 3435294, at *2 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] December 15, 2005, no pet.) (memo. op.) (complaining party must object to failure to make a record to preserve error.).  Accordingly, the issues are overruled.

            The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

                                                                                    PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Brown, and Christopher.

---

[1] See Tex. R. App. P. 34.6(c).