Court Opinion

ID: 9672494
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:55:54.040846+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:16.609776
License: Public Domain

ORDER DENYING PETITION TO REHEAR
Defendant Grover McCormick has filed a petition to rehear in which he argues, among other things, that this Court did not have jurisdiction to review the judgment as to defendant McCormick.
The record reflects that although appellees did not file a notice of appeal, they presented additional issues for review concerning the trial court’s action in dismissing the case as to defendant McCormick. Defendant McCormick was served with a copy of appellee’s brief which presented an issue seeking to reverse the trial court’s judgment in his favor. Although McCormick initially chose to take no action in response to appellee’s brief, he now states on petition to rehear that he was not served a copy of the notice of appeal as required by Rule 5, T.R.A.P. This defense comes too late as the failure to serve a copy of the notice of appeal on opposing counsel is not jurisdictional and may be waived. See G. F. Plunk Const. Co. v. Barrett Properties, Inc., 640 S.W.2d 215 (Tenn.1982).
Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 13, T.R.A.P., “cross appeals, separate appeals and separate applications for permission to appeal are not required.” The Comment to this section states in part:
... [sjince neither the issues presented for review nor the arguments in support of those issues are set forth in the notice of appeal, there seems to be no good reason for so limiting the questions an appellee may urge on review. The result of eliminating any requirement that an appellee file his own notice of appeal is that once any party files a notice of appeal the appellate court may consider the case as a whole.
The remainder of the petition to rehear presents matters which this Court considered in its original Opinion.
Accordingly, the petition to rehear is denied.
/s/Crawford CRAWFORD, J.
*686/s/Highers HIGHERS, J.
/s/Farmer PARMER, J.