Gassaway v. Patty

604 S.W.2d 60, 1980 Tenn. App. LEXIS 375
CourtCourt of Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedJune 18, 1980
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 604 S.W.2d 60 (Gassaway v. Patty) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gassaway v. Patty, 604 S.W.2d 60, 1980 Tenn. App. LEXIS 375 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1980).

Opinion

OPINION

FRANKS, Judge.

The threshold issue is whether appellant timely filed a notice of appeal, as required by T.R.A.P., Rule 4.

The pertinent chronology is: judgment was entered on May 25, 1979, in the chancery court. On June 11, 1979, appellant filed a motion seeking to set aside the judgment, grant rehearing or enter judgment for defendant; the motion was overruled by order entered on July 26, 1979. Appellant filed another motion on August 9, 1979, asking the court to reconsider its decision on the prior motion and set aside the judgment and grant appellant relief and otherwise alter and amend the judgment. On September 14, 1979, the trial judge entered an order overruling and dismissing the motion filed on August 9. On September 25, 1979, notice of appeal “from judgment and motion denying rehearing thereof on September 7, 1979” was filed.

In appeals as of right, T.R.A.P., Rule 4(a), establishes the time frame for filing notice of appeal:

In an appeal as of right to the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or Court of Criminal Appeals the notice of appeal required by rule 3 shall be filed with and received by the clerk of the trial court within 30 days after the date of entry of the judgment appealed from.

T.R.A.P., Rule 4(b), specifies certain post-trial motions that, if timely filed, terminate [61]*61the running of the time for filing notice of appeal:

In a civil action if a timely motion under the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure is filed in the trial court by any party: (1) under rule 50.02 for judgment in accordance with a motion for a directed verdict; (2) under rule 52.02 to amend or make additional findings of fact, whether or not an alteration of the judgment would be required if the motion is granted; (3) under rule 59.03 to alter or amend the judgment; or (4) under rule 59.01 for a new trial, the time for appeal for all parties shall run from the entry of the order denying a new trial or granting or denying any other such motion.

Although no technical forms of motions are required by T.R.C.P., Rule 8.05(1), appellant’s motions filed on June 11 and August 9, 1979, in substance are motions for a new trial and/or motion to alter or amend the judgment. T.R.C.P., Rules 59.01 and 59.03, mandate that either “shall be filed and served within 30 days after entry of the judgment.”

The time for filing notice of appeal was terminated on June 11, 1979, when appellant filed his motion. The time for filing notice of appeal began to run upon the entry of the order of July 26, 1979, overruling the motion for rehearing. The language of T.R.A.P., Rule 4(b), unmistakably mandates: “the time for appeal for all parties shall run from the entry of the order denying a new trial . . . (Emphasis supplied.)

Calculating 30 days from the entry of the order overruling the motion for a new trial on July 26, 1979, the notice of appeal filed on September 25, 1979, was untimely.

The subsequent motion filed on August 9, 1979, was not filed within 30 days of the entry of the judgment, as required by T.R. C.P., Rule 59, and, as Professor Sobieski has noted, if the motions enumerated in T.R. A.P., Rule 4(b) terminate the running of the time within which notice of appeal is to be filed, the motion must be “timely” under the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure.1 The motion filed on August 9, was not timely within the meaning of T.R.A.P., Rule 4(b) and T.R.C.P., Rule 59.

In reaching this conclusion we are not unmindful of the Supreme Court’s policy of liberality in resolving doubt as to the proper construction of statutes and rules regulating appeals in favor of the right of appeal. See Saunders v. McKenzie, 572 S.W.2d 653 (Tenn.1978). But Rule 4(b) clearly mandates that the time for appeal for all parties shall run from the entry of an order denying a new trial. The Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure provide procedures to be followed in order that the rights of the parties can be resolved with certainty and finality. To validate appellant’s appeal would require us to disregard the express language of the rules and the result would enable parties to file repeated post-judgment motions in the trial court. The rules are designed to avoid undue delays and T.R.A.P., Rule 2, expressly prohibits appellate courts from extending the time for taking an appeal as of right since the rights of the parties remain uncertain during the time available for filing a notice of appeal. Appellant’s appeal is dismissed with costs assessed against appellant and the cause remanded to the trial court.

PARROTT, P.'J. (E. S.), and SANDERS, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

The Wise Group, Inc. v. Dwight Holland
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2024
John Schmeeckle v. Brittany Dekreek
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2024
Flexibility Capital, Inc. v. Sabatino Cupelli
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2024
Sheila Renee Grissette v. Don Edwin Grissette
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2021
Dominique Clarke v. Kymberly Ash
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2019
Gerald Largen v. The City Of Harriman
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2018
Maureen Davis v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2018
Carol Ann Graybeal v. Howell H. Sherrod, Jr.
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2012
Maston G. Lyons, III v. Kimberly G. Leffew
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2011
Elam v. South Carolina Department of Transportation
602 S.E.2d 772 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2004)
Albert v. Frye
145 S.W.3d 526 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2004)
Govindaswamy Nagarajan v. Sandra Scheick
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2003
Brian Oakley v. State
Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 2002
Hawkins v. Hawkins
883 S.W.2d 622 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1994)
Brumlow v. Brumlow
729 S.W.2d 103 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1986)
Jefferson v. Pneumo Services Corp.
699 S.W.2d 181 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1985)
John Barb, Inc. v. Underwriters at Lloyds of London
653 S.W.2d 422 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
604 S.W.2d 60, 1980 Tenn. App. LEXIS 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gassaway-v-patty-tennctapp-1980.