Olubajo v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.

Blackburn, Presiding Judge. In this dispossessory action, Abimbola Olubajo, acting pro se, appeals the trial court’s grant of a writ of possession in favor of Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“Deutsche Bank”). Because Olubajo failed to file a transcript of the bench trial, we affirm. Deutsche Bank instituted dispossessory proceedings against Olubajo, claiming that Olubajo was a tenant at sufferance after a foreclosure sale. Olubajo answered, claiming simply that the foreclosure sale was “wrongful.” Following a bench trial, the court issued a writ of possession in favor of Deutsche Bank. On appeal, Olubajo makes various arguments based on factual issues that would require us to review the evidence submitted at trial. [Olubajo], however, failed to file a transcript of the proceedings and apparently did not attempt to reconstruct the transcript as allowed by OCGA § 5-6-41 (g) and (i). When a transcript of the evidence is necessary, as it is here, and the appellant omits it from the record or fails to submit a statutorily authorized substitute, we must assume that the evidence supported the grant of a writ of possession. As the *155 appellant[, Olubajo] had the burden to affirmatively show error by the record. This [Olubajo] failed to do. Therefore, we must presume the trial court’s judgment granting [Deutsche Bank] a writ of possession is correct. Decided June 7, 2006 — Reconsideration denied June 27, 2006. Abimbola O. Olubajo, pro se. McCalla & Raymer, Robert M. Sheffield, for appellee. Harden v. Young. 1 See Simmons v. Sopramco III, LLC. 2 Judgment affirmed. Mikell and Adams, JJ., concur. Footnotes [1] Harden v. Young, 268 Ga. App. 619, 620 (606 SE2d 6) (2004). [2] Simmons v. Sopramco III, LLC, 278 Ga. App. 830 (630 SE2d 61) (2006).