discussing the “well-established rule that the appellant has an affirmative duty of showing error upon the record” and explaining that “[t]his rule is premised upon the fundamental proposition that an appellate court will not presume error and will affirm the judgment appealed from if supported on any valid legal ground”
How later courts described this case
- discussing the “well-established rule that the appellant has an affirmative duty of showing error upon the record” and explaining that “[t]his rule is premised upon the fundamental proposition that an appellate court will not presume error and will affirm the judgment appealed from if supported on any valid legal ground”
- holding that, in order to secure a reversal, “the appellant has an affirmative duty of showing error upon the fee-' ord”
- stating that an appellate court “will affirm the judgment appealed from if *669 supported on any valid legal ground”
- stating that in order to secure a reversal “the appellant has an affirmative duty of showing error upon the record”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
I respectfully dissent, and, in accord with my views stated in previous decisions of this Court, would hold the entire Medical Malpractice Act unconstitutional. *Page 1266