Case Name: Bob L. MANSELL, Appellant, v. CITY OF LAWTON, Appellee
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1994-06-28
Citations: 877 P.2d 1120
Docket Number: No. 82589
Parties: Bob L. MANSELL, Appellant, v. CITY OF LAWTON, Appellee.
Judges: HODGES, C.J., LAVENDER, V.C.J., and ALMA WILSON, KAUGER and WATT, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Pacific Reporter 2d
Volume: 877
Pages: 1120–1129

Head Matter:
Bob L. MANSELL, Appellant, v. CITY OF LAWTON, Appellee.
No. 82589.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma.
June 28, 1994.
As Corrected June 29, 1994.
Steven S. Mansell, Oklahoma City, for appellant.
John H. Vincent, Lawton, for appellee.

Opinion:
SUMMERS, Justice.
The trial judge sustained a motion to dismiss, and a judge-signed minute to that effect was filed that same day on October 7, 1993. A journal entry of judgment was then filed on October 15, 1993. The petition in error was filed on Monday, November 15, 1993. Appellee moves to dismiss for untimeliness.
Effective October 1, 1993, a minute entry is not an appealable order. 12 O.S.Supp.1993 § 696.2(C). That statute, which took effect that date, states in part:
The following shall not constitute a judgment, decree or appealable order: A minute entry; verdict; informal statement of the proceedings and relief awarded, including, but limited to, a letter to a party or parties indicating the ruling or instructions for preparing the judgment, decree or appealable order.
Id. § 696.2(C), (emphasis added).
Minute entries are usually considered to be the function of a clerk, but 12 O.S.1991 § 23 states that a judge may also prepare an entry in the form of a minute. As a matter of courthouse practice it may be titled as a court minute order, court minute, minute order, minute, or have no title. This one had none. A minute contains a brief description of the order or judgment rendered. 12 O.S. 1991 § 23.
Section 696.2 also states that the time to appeal does not begin to run until the appeal-able order or judgment is prepared in a certain form and filed with the trial court clerk.
The time for appeal shall not begin to run until a written judgment, decree or appeal-able order, prepared in conformance with Section 10 of this act, is filed with the court clerk, regardless of whether the judgment, decree, or appealable order is effective when pronounced or when it is filed.
Id. § 696.2(D).
Section 10 of the act was codified at 12 O.S.Supp.1993 § 696.3, and requires the ap-pealable order or judgment to have a caption including the name of the court, the names and designation of the parties, the file number of the case, and the title of the instrument. It further requires a statement of the disposition, including the relief awarded, signature and title of the court, and other matters approved by the court.
A judgment or appealable order conforming to § 696.3 is "a jurisdictional prerequisite to the commencement of an appeal." 12 O.S.Supp.1993 § 696.2(C). See also 12 O.S.Supp.1993 § 990A(A). Section 696.3 requires the appealable order to have a title. If an order has no title, or bears a title in some form using the word "minute", and otherwise meets the description of a minute, we believe the Legislature intended it not to be appealable, 12 O.S. § 696.2(C), even though it may have been appealable prior to October 1, 1993. These recent statutory changes define the appealable event according to the form by which the decision is filed. 12 O.S.Supp.1993 § 696.2, 696.3. This minute entry is in a form that makes it not an appealable order. 12 O.S.Supp.1993 § 696.2, 696.3.
The journal entry of judgment filed on October 15, 1993 satisfies the form required by 12 O.S.Supp.1993 § 696.3. The petition in error must be filed within thirty days of the date the journal entry of judgment was filed in the trial court. 12 O.S.Supp.1993 § 990A(A). Thirty days from October 15, 1993 was Sunday, November 14, 1993, and because of that the Appellant was authorized to file the petition in error on the following Monday, November 15, 1993. 25 O.S.1991 § 82.1. The petition in error is thus timely filed, the motion to dismiss is denied, and the appeal shall proceed.
HODGES, C.J., LAVENDER, V.C.J., and ALMA WILSON, KAUGER and WATT, JJ., concur.
SIMMS and OPALA, JJ., concur in result.
HARGRAVE, J., dissents.