Wilson v. Street, 22768 (5-15-2009)

OPINION

{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant James Street appeals from a judgment for rent in favor of plaintiff-appellee James Wilson. Street maintains that the trial court erred both in finding the existence of a contract implied-in-fact and in its determination of the terms of that contract. Because Street has failed to provide a complete record for our review, he has not overcome the presumption of regularity in the trial court proceedings.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

I

{¶ 2} The trial court made the following findings of fact:

{¶ 3} Street and Wilson became friends in the…