Presenting a sufficient record that demonstrates error overcomes the presumption that the judgment is correct. As noted in Steuri v. Junkin (1938) 27 Cal.App.2d 758, 760, if the record is silent, the presumption of correctness will control, but where the record demonstrates what the trial court did and error below, the presumption is overcome. “When the record clearly demonstrates what the trial court did, we will not presume it did something different.” (Lafayette Morehouse, Inc. v. Chronicle Publishing Co. (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 1379, 1384.)

So, how can an attorney fail to create a meaningful record? You might have a sidebar discussion, which may include a ruling, or an in-chambers conference, that is not reported. You might withdraw certain jury instructions and fail to make those withdrawn instructions part of the record. You might give the court reporter a break and waive reporting certain aspects of the trial, such as voir dire or closing arguments.

Failing to present a meaningful record may be more of a matter of choice. A “meaningful” record does not mean including only the items that favor your position. For instance, if you are appealing from the granting of a summary judgment, denial or granting of a post-trial motion, or an anti-SLAPP motion, you should designate all documents that were considered at the hearing. That shows you are fair and credible, and you believe your position is strong enough that you don't need to hide documents and you will win on the merits.

That doesn’t mean intentionally omitting the opposing attorney’s filings. While this omission could be cured by a counter-designation or a later motion to augment, it does not reflect an objective presentation of the facts and could harm your credibility. In the worst case scenario, the reviewing court may conclude that it does not have an adequate record to make a determination that an error has occurred.

If the appellants fails to present a meaningful record, that puts the respondent in a quandary. Should he or she do nothing and let the reviewing court conclude the record is insufficient? Or should the respondent’s attorney provide the missing parts of the record, especially if the omitted portions will support respondent’s position? That, of course, will depend on the facts of the case.