# Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories

> Ohio Supreme Court · February 13, 1980 · 61 Ohio St. 2d 197

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6756756

## Case

- **Full name:** Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 13, 1980
- **Citations:** 61 Ohio St. 2d 197; 15 Ohio Op. 3d 218; 400 N.E.2d 384; 1980 Ohio LEXIS 636
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Holmes
- **Judges:** Brown, Celebrezze, Herbert, Holmes, Locher, Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 2,066 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6756756

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that "[t]he duty to provide a transcript for appellate review falls upon the appellant. This is necessarily so because an appellant bears the burden of showing error by reference to matters in the record. * * * When portions of the transcript necessary for resolutio…
- holding that it is appellant's burden to ensure all necessary parts of the record are before the appellate court, and when a piece of the record necessary to determine an assignment of error is missing, an appellate court has no choice but to presume the validity of the procee…
- holding that the duty to provide a transcript for appellate review falls upon the appellant because 2 OHIO FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS she bears the burden of showing error by reference to matters in the record
- stating that "[t]he duty to provide a transcript for appellate review falls upon the appellant. This is necessarily so because an appellant bears the burden of showing error by reference to matters in the record"
- holding that when the record is silent on whether ten years had lapsed since a criminal conviction, the appellate court will "presume the validity of the lower court's proceedings and affirm."

## Opinion text

Holmes, J.,
concurring. I am in agreement with the majority opinion, but would like to point out that in addition to the avenues open to the parties, as suggested in the opinion, the Appellate Rules, by way of App. R. 9(E), provide that the Court of Appeals may correct or modify the record to reflect that which occurred in the trial court. The following pertinent language is to be found within App. R. 9(E):
“ * * * If anything material to either party is omitted from the record by error or accident or is misstated therein, the parties by stipulation, or the trial court, either before or after the record is transmitted to the court of appeals, or the court of appeals, on proper suggestion or of its own initiative, may direct that the omission or misstatement be corrected, and if necessary that a supplemental record be certified and transmitted.”

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6756756. Public record. Not legal advice.