the complaint is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Wagner v. Strickland, 908 So.2d 549 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). If a plaintiff shows good cause or excusable neglect, the court must extend the time for service of process and has no discretion to do otherwise; however, if neither good cause nor excusable neglect is shown, the trial court is not required to dismiss the action without prejudice but is left to exercise its discretion. Pixton v. Williams Scotsman, Inc., 924 So.2d 37 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Here, without having a transcript of the hearings conducted below, we are unable to determine that the trial court committed any error in dismissing Robinson’s complaint. Accordingly, we affirm the instant dismissal order. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979)(<HOLDING>); Maslow v. Edwards, 886 So.2d 1027 (Fla. 5th
holding that appellate review of hearsay issues is de novo with no presumption of correctness holding that it is the appellants burden to present a record to overcome the presumption of correctness of the trial courts findings holding that it is the duty of the appellant to overcome the presumption of the correctness of the trial courts judgment by demonstrating some reversible error holding that where the appellant has failed to demonstrate error the court is not required to search the record for an error holding in appellate proceedings decision of trial court has presumption of correctness and burden is on appellant to demonstrate error