Ajinwo v. Chileshe, 420 P.3d 51

Appellant Okechukwu Ajinwo filed an amended petition for paternity and custody; the district court set an order to show cause hearing for December 21, 2016.
At the hearing, counsel for both parties appeared and addressed the case status; the minute entry reflects that the court then dismissed Ajinwo’s amended petition without prejudice.
Ajinwo appealed, arguing the dismissal was sua sponte and denied him a meaningful opportunity to be heard and violated parental-care, due process, and access-to-courts rights.
Ajinwo timely requested a transcript, but the district court filed a note that the hearing was not recorded.
Rule 11(g) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure permits reconstruction of an unavailable transcript by a statement of proceedings; Ajinwo did not invoke that procedure.
Because the appellate record lacked any reconstructed statement of the hearing, the court concluded the record was inadequate to review the asserted errors and therefore presumed the regularity of the district court’s dismissal and affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court sua sponte dismissed the petition without providing Ajinwo a meaningful opportunity to be heard	Ajinwo: dismissal was sua sponte and denied him a meaningful hearing and violated rights	Hileshe: enforcement of record rules and no transcript available; no reconstructed record	Court: cannot review merits because record is inadequate; presumes regularity and affirms dismissal
Whether the dismissal violated constitutional rights (parental care, due process, access to courts)	Ajinwo: loss of constitutional protections due to lack of explanation and hearing	Hileshe: appellate review requires a record; constitutional claims cannot be evaluated without transcript/reconstruction	Court: constitutional claims unreviewable on this record; appellant bears duty to provide transcript or reconstruct; claims fail on appeal for lack of record
Whether appellant’s failure to use Utah R. App. P. 11(g) to reconstruct the hearing forecloses appellate review	Ajinwo: relied on existing record and did not reconstruct	Hileshe: appellee moved to supplement; court noted remedy lies with appellant	Court: appellant had duty to supplement under Rule 11(g); his choice not to do so means court presumes proceedings were regular and affirms

Reperex, Inc. v. May's Custom Tile, Inc., 292 P.3d 694 (Utah Ct. App. 2012) (appellant bears duty to support error allegations with an adequate record)
State v. Pritchett, 69 P.3d 1278 (Utah 2003) (where record is inadequate on appeal, courts presume regularity of trial court proceedings)