Opinion
No. 05-03-00494-CV
Opinion issued June 2, 2004.
On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 380-51510-02.
Affirmed.
Before Justices Chief Justice THOMAS, Justices MORRIS and WHITTINGTON.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kamil Osman Sahinalp appeals the trial court's judgment granting a divorce and awarding property and attorney's fees to his wife, Yuliya M. Sahinalp. In fourteen issues, appellant contends the trial judge abused his discretion in granting appellee certain property in the divorce, denying appellant's request for an annulment, awarding attorney's fees to appellee, ordering appellant to pay income tax owed by appellee, and denying several of appellant's motions. We affirm.
In all fourteen issues, appellant contends the trial judge abused his discretion in this case. However, appellant did not request, and the appellate record does not contain, the reporter's record for the hearings or trial on the merits. See Tex.R.App.P. 34.6. We presume a judge acts within his discretion unless the record demonstrates the contrary. Navistar Int'l Corp. v. Valles, 740 S.W.2d 4, 6 (Tex. App.-El Paso 1987, no writ). Thus, to establish the trial judge abused his discretion in this case, appellant was required to bring a record showing error exists and that such error mandates reversal of the cause. See Christiansen v. Prezelski, 782 S.W.2d 842, 843 (Tex. 1990); Simon v. York Crane Rigging Co., 739 S.W.2d 793, 795 (Tex. 1987); Marion v. Davis, 106 S.W.3d 860, 869 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2003, pet. denied). Because appellant failed to bring a reporter's record, we must presume the evidence presented at trial and in the hearings was sufficient to support the trial court's orders and final judgment. See Bryant v. United Shortline Inc. Assurance Serv., 972 S.W.2d 26, 31 (Tex. 1998) ("We indulge every presumption in favor of the trial court's findings in the absence of a statement of facts."); Murray v. Devco, Ltd., 731 S.W.2d 555, 557 (Tex. 1987) (in absence of statement of facts, reviewing court must presume that sufficient evidence was introduced to support jury's findings and trial court's judgment); Sandoval v. Comm'n for Lawyer Discipline, 25 S.W.3d 720, 722 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. denied) (holding reviewing court must presume omitted evidence supported trial court's discretionary sanction decision when party failed to bring reporter's record of sanction hearing); Fiesta Mart, Inc. v. Hall, 886 S.W.2d 440, 443 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, no writ) (holding appellate courts must indulge all presumptions in favor of trial court's ruling when party appeals from ruling on motion without statement of facts from hearing). Because appellant failed to bring a record showing the trial judge abused his discretion, we overrule his fourteen issues.
We affirm the trial court's judgment.