Hughes v. County of Morgan

452 N.E.2d 447, 1983 Ind. App. LEXIS 3252
CourtIndiana Court of Appeals
DecidedAugust 19, 1983
Docket1-783A220
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 452 N.E.2d 447 (Hughes v. County of Morgan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hughes v. County of Morgan, 452 N.E.2d 447, 1983 Ind. App. LEXIS 3252 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is pending before the Court on the appellees' Motion to Dismiss Appeal and, in the Alternative, to Affirm the Judgment of the Trial Court, which alleges the appellant has failed to comply with the provisions of Appellate Rule 2 in that appellant failed to file his praecipe within thirty days after the ruling on the motion to correct errors, and the appellant failed to file his Submission for Pre-Appeal Conference within ten days after the filing of the prac-cipe. We dismiss.

The right to appeal is forfeited if the praecipe is not timely filed. Appellate Rule 2(A); Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Hutchens (1973), 260 Ind. 561, 297 N.E.2d 807.

The appellant's Submission for Pre-Appeal Conference was filed with the Clerk of this Court on July 15, 1988. The documentation attached to it discloses that the motion to correct errors was overruled on May 25, 1983. The copy of the praccipe attached is not file-stamped, however, the certificate of service on opposing counsel is dated June 29, 1983. Appellees' counsel alleges under oath that he is informed the praccipe was filed on June 27, 1983. Either of those dates is more than thirty days after the ruling on the motion to correct errors, and the date of filing of the Submission for Pre-Appeal Conference is more than ten days after either of those dates.

Appellate Rule 2(C) was adopted by the Supreme Court of Indiana on May 10, 1982. The members of the bar of this state have had over a year to become informed of the Rule and its requirements. This Court has previously given notice by publication in Res Gestae, and by other means, that as of July 1, 1983, the Rule would be strictly enforced.

By reason of the appellant's failure to comply with the requirements of the Rule, this cause is dismissed.

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

Related

Jennings v. Davis
634 N.E.2d 810 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1994)
Slay v. Marion County Sheriff's Department
603 N.E.2d 877 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1992)
CNA Insurance Companies (CNA) v. Vellucci
596 N.E.2d 926 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1992)
Swain v. Swain
565 N.E.2d 1134 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1991)
Sartain v. Blunck
453 N.E.2d 324 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
452 N.E.2d 447, 1983 Ind. App. LEXIS 3252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-county-of-morgan-indctapp-1983.