The RT Wars continue...

This time it's an appeal from a preliminary injunction order. Is a reporter's transcript really necessary for such an appeal? According to the majority here, it sure is. (And you already knew this decision is from 2/5, right?)

Defendants argue the trial court abused its discretion in granting the preliminary injunction because it misapplied the law and relied upon inadmissible evidence. But defendants concede they did not provide this court with a reporter’s transcript of the hearing or a suitable substitute. Defendants assert the reporter’s transcript is unnecessary because the trial court’s opinion and the basis for its order are set forth in the written minute order. But a judgment is presumed to be correct and appellant has a duty to provide the reviewing court with an adequate record to demonstrate error. [cites] Without a proper record, we cannot determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in granting the preliminary injunction. In numerous situations, appellate courts have refused to reach the merits of an appellant’s claims because that appellant failed to provide a reporter’s transcript of a pertinent proceeding or a suitable substitute.

Episode XIII: Revenge of the Missing RT

And speaking of the missing record material tanking an appeal, here's one today (from 1/1): If you're appealing from a summary judgment, you better include the summary judgment motion (and the complaint) in the record! (Yes, even if you're acting pro per.)