Court Opinion

ID: 9686863
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:09:58.701247+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:22.646980
License: Public Domain

COLEMAN, Justice
(concurring specially):
Appellant states one proposition of law in her brief, to wit:
“THIRTY DAYS AFTER A DECREE IS ENTERED (EXCEPT FOR CLERICAL ERRORS), THE COURT LOSES ALL POWER TO MODIFY IT EXCEPT UPON THE TIMELY FILING OF AN APPLICATION FOR REHEARING OR A BILL OF REVIEW OR A BILL IN THE NATURE OF A BILL OF REVIEW.”
Appellant’s argument, as I understand it, is to the effect that the trial court erred in rendering the decree from which this appeal was taken for the reason that the instant decree is indirectly and in effect a modification of the divorce decree rendered in 1968.
The instant suit is a suit for sale of lands for division of the proceeds among *195the owners of the land. I am of opinion that the instant suit is not a proceeding to modify the divorce decree and, therefore, that the objection urged by appellant is not well taken. No other objection being urged by appellant, I concur in affirmance.