Douglas Robert Strehlow v. Renee Marie Cera

COURT OF APPEALS
DECISION NOTICE
DATED AND FILED This opinion is subject to further editing. If
published, the official version will appear in
the bound volume of the Official Reports.
November 27, 2019
A party may file with the Supreme Court a
Sheila T. Reiff petition to review an adverse decision by the
Clerk of Court of Appeals Court of Appeals. See WIS. STAT. § 808.10
and RULE 809.62.

Appeal No. 2019AP842 Cir. Ct. No. 2019SC546

STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS
DISTRICT IV

DOUGLAS ROBERT STREHLOW,

PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V.

RENEE MARIE CERA,

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

APPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Dodge County:
BRIAN A. PFITZINGER, Judge. Affirmed.

¶1 KLOPPENBURG, J.1 Douglas Robert Strehlow filed this small-
claims action against Renee Marie Cera, seeking eviction and monetary relief for

1
This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(a) (2017-18).
All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2017-18 version unless otherwise noted.
No. 2019AP842

Cera’s alleged failure to pay rent due for March 2019. At a hearing on April 22,
2019, Strehlow submitted as exhibits the lease agreement between him and Cera,
and the five-day and fourteen-day notices that he had given Cera. On April 23,
2019, the circuit court entered judgment for eviction and for money in the amount
of $1,371.50. Cera appeals. As I explain, her appeal fails in several respects.

¶2 Cera’s primary argument on appeal is that she had a defense to
Strehlow’s claim, namely, that she did not pay the full amount of rent due in
March based on alleged deficiencies in the condition of the rental unit, Strehlow’s
alleged failure to correct those deficiencies, and Cera’s alleged efforts to correct
those deficiencies. Cera attaches to her appellant’s brief copies of photographs,
email correspondence, and invoices in support of her argument.

¶3 However, Cera’s appeal fails because she does not cite to any part of
the record showing that these materials were presented to and considered by the
circuit court, as required by WIS. STAT. RULE 809.19(1)(d)-(e). This is
inappropriate even for a pro se litigant. See Waushara Cty. v. Graf, 166 Wis. 2d
442, 452, 480 N.W.2d 16 (1992) (“Pro se appellants must satisfy all procedural
requirements, unless those requirements are waived by the court.” (alteration in
original)). This court has no duty to scour the record to review arguments
unaccompanied by adequate record citation. Roy v. St. Lukes Med. Ctr., 2007 WI
App 218, ¶10 n.1, 305 Wis. 2d 658, 741 N.W.2d 256. Moreover, this court
generally does not consider arguments unsupported by references to the circuit
court record. See State v. McMorris, 2007 WI App 231, ¶30, 306 Wis. 2d 79, 742
N.W.2d 322 (court of appeals may “choose not to consider … arguments that lack
proper citations to the record”).

2
No. 2019AP842

¶4 Cera’s appeal also fails because she in effect asks that this court
retry the case and make independent factual findings, which this court cannot do.
See Wurtz v. Fleischman, 97 Wis. 2d 100, 107 n.3, 293 N.W.2d 155 (1980).
Moreover, “[w]hen the [circuit] court acts as the finder of fact, it is the ultimate
arbiter of the credibility of the witnesses and of the weight to be given to each
witness’s testimony.” Lessor v. Wangelin, 221 Wis. 2d 659, 665, 586 N.W.2d 1
(Ct. App. 1998). “[I]t is the burden of the appellant to demonstrate that the
[circuit] court erred.” Gaethke v. Pozder, 2017 WI App 38, ¶36, 376 Wis. 2d 448,
899 N.W.2d 381 (quoted source omitted). Cera cannot meet this burden because
the circuit court’s judgments do not include the court’s findings that it made at the
hearing (and, as noted next, there is no transcript of the hearing in the record).
Therefore, Cera is unable to demonstrate that the court’s findings are clearly
erroneous. See WIS. STAT. § 805.17(2) (the circuit court’s findings of fact are
reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard); Global Steel Prods. Corp. v.
Ecklund, 2002 WI App 91, ¶10, 253 Wis. 2d 588, 644 N.W.2d 269 (the circuit
court’s “findings will not be overturned on appeal unless they are inherently or
patently incredible, or in conflict with the uniform course of nature or with fully
established or conceded facts.”).

¶5 In addition to arguing that the circuit court erred in ordering
eviction, Cera argues that she was not given the opportunity to present her
evidence or given a fair hearing. However, as previewed above, I cannot assess
the validity of her arguments because she failed to ensure that the transcript of the
hearing was included in the record. “It is the appellant’s responsibility to ensure
completion of the appellate record.” State v. McAttee, 2001 WI App 262, ¶5 n.1,
248 Wis. 2d 865, 637 N.W.2d 774. When the record is incomplete in regard to an
issue on appeal, this court assumes that the missing material supports the circuit

3
No. 2019AP842

court’s ruling. Fiumefreddo v. McLean, 174 Wis. 2d 10, 27, 496 N.W.2d 226
(Ct. App. 1993). I rely on that assumption here and conclude that the circuit
court’s judgments are supported by the record developed at the hearing.

¶6 I acknowledge Cera’s assertions of the harsh consequences of the
eviction and monetary judgments in her situation. However, for all of the reasons
stated above, her appeal from those judgments fails and, therefore, I affirm.

By the Court.—Order affirmed.

This opinion will not be published. See WIS. STAT. RULE
809.23(1)(b)4.

4