County Civil Court: CONTRACTS – record on appeal – without a transcript, appellant unable to demonstrate trial court committed reversible error in awarding consumer

$ 1,900.00 to replace her laptop computer that was stolen from computer business - Final Judgment affirmed. Integrated Technology Solutions of Tampa Bay, Inc. v. Goldfarb, No. 05-0044AP-88A (Fla. 6th Cir. App. Ct. May 18, 2006).

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA

APPELLATE DIVISION

INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS

OF TAMPA BAY, INC., d/b/a COMPUTERLAND

Appellant,

vs. Appeal No.05-0044AP-88A

UCN522005AP000044XXXXCV

HELENE J. GOLDFARB,

Appellee.

____________________________________/

Appeal from Final Judgment

Pinellas County Court

Judge Dorothy L. Vaccaro

R. Todd Burbine, Esquire

Attorney for Appellant

Eugene P. Castagliuolo, Esquire

Attorney for Appellee

ORDER AND OPINION

THIS CAUSE came before the Court on appeal, filed by Integrated Technology Solutions of Tampa Bay, Inc. d/b/a Computerland (Computerland), from the Amended Final Judgment for Plaintiff, entered May 17, 2005, in favor of Helene J. Goldfarb (Goldfarb). Upon review of the briefs, the record and being otherwise fully advised, the Court affirms the trial court’s ruling as set forth below.

The record shows that Goldfarb filed a Statement of Claim in Small Claims Court seeking reimbursement for her cost of a new laptop computer in the cost of $ 2,250.00, plus costs, interest and attorneys fees. Goldfarb purchased a new laptop computer after her used laptop was stolen from Computerland, where the laptop was being serviced. The matter went before the trial court for a non-jury trial upon which the trial court awarded Goldfarb $ 1,900.00 in principal and $ 198.00 in court costs.

Before this Court, Computerland raises several issues including that the trial court failed to properly apply the law of bailment, failed to consider the breach of contract by Goldfarb and failed to apply the principle of unjust enrichment. The Court finds that Computerland is unable to demonstrate reversible error as there is no transcript of the proceedings below. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979)(stating that the decision of the trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error); Bei v. Harper, 475 So.2d 912, 914 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)(same). Accordingly, the Court finds that the trial court’s judgment must be affirmed.

Therefore, it is,

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Amended Final Judgment for Plaintiff is affirmed. It is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Appellee’s Motion to Award Attorneys Fees Pursuant to Florida Statute § 57.105 is denied.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at Clearwater, Pinellas County, Florida this ______ of May 2006.

________________________________

JOHN A. SCHAEFER

Circuit Judge, Appellate Division

______________________________ ______________________________

LAUREN LAUGHLIN JAMES CASE

Circuit Judge, Appellate Division Circuit Judge, Appellate Division

Copies furnished to:

Judge Dorothy L. Vaccaro

R. Todd Burbine, Esquire

595 Main Street

Dunedin, FL 34698

Eugene P. Castagliuolo, Esquire

Post Office Box 39

Safety Harbor, FL 34695-0039