Utah Court of Appeals
What happens when appellants fail to provide adequate records on appeal? Reperex, Inc. v. May's Custom Tile, Inc. Explained
Summary
Reperex filed an interlocutory appeal challenging the trial court’s denial of motions to compel, enlarge discovery time, and amend the complaint to add defendants. The court of appeals affirmed because Reperex failed to provide an adequate record, including no transcript of the hearing and no findings from the trial court.
Analysis
Background and Facts
In Reperex, Inc. v. May’s Custom Tile, Inc., Reperex purchased May’s tile installation business but later sued for breach of contract, conversion, and fraud, claiming May failed to deliver the promised goodwill valued at $840,800. During discovery, Reperex filed multiple motions to compel seeking financial records from May’s companies. The trial court granted some requests but ultimately denied Reperex’s fourth motion to compel, motion to enlarge discovery time, and motion to amend the complaint to add four defendants. Reperex pursued an interlocutory appeal but crucially filed a “Certificate That Transcript Is Not Required,” choosing not to include a transcript of the hearing.
Key Legal Issues
The primary issues were whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Reperex’s discovery and amendment motions. However, the case ultimately turned on a procedural issue: whether the appellate court could review these claims without an adequate record on appeal.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Utah Court of Appeals applied the abuse of discretion standard to review discovery and amendment rulings. However, the court emphasized that Utah Rule of Appellate Procedure 11 requires appellants challenging findings or conclusions to include relevant transcript evidence. The court explained that “[w]hen a [party] predicates error to this Court, he has the duty and responsibility of supporting such allegation by an adequate record.” Because Reperex provided no transcript and the trial court’s final order contained no findings of fact or reasoning, the appellate court had no basis to evaluate whether the trial court abused its discretion. The court noted that “absent additional information, Reperex is ‘fatally handicapped in asserting [the] trial court[‘s] abuse of discretion.'”
Practice Implications
This decision underscores the critical importance of creating an adequate record for appeal. When appealing discretionary rulings, practitioners must order transcripts of relevant hearings to preserve the trial court’s reasoning. The court’s presumption of regularity means that without a proper record, appellate courts will assume the trial court acted appropriately. This case serves as a cautionary tale about the consequences of inadequate appellate record preparation.
Case Details
Case Name
Reperex, Inc. v. May’s Custom Tile, Inc.
Citation
2012 UT App 287
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20110760-CA
Date Decided
October 12, 2012
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
An appellant must provide an adequate record on appeal to support claims of trial court error, and without a transcript or adequate findings, appellate courts cannot review the merits of discretionary rulings.
Standard of Review
Abuse of discretion for motions to compel and motions to amend
Practice Tip
Always order transcripts of hearings when appealing discretionary rulings, as appellate courts cannot review the merits without an adequate record showing the basis for the trial court’s decision.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.