Court Opinion

ID: 9931785
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:29:28.715294+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:28:15.753236
License: Public Domain

While the record does not affirmatively show that the amendment to the motion for a new trial was made prior to the court's order overruling the motion on January 10, I assume that the amendment was filed prior to the time the trial judge ruled on the motion for new trial. A trial judge has discretion, of course, to allow an amendment to a motion to state an additional ground for the granting of the motion even beyond the 30-day period if the original motion was timely.Moore's Federal Practice and Procedure, para. 59.09[2]; SeePogue v. Int'l Industries, Inc., 524 F.2d 342 (6 Cir. 1975).
The trial court's ruling on January 10, in my opinion, applied to the motion, as amended; therefore, the 42-day time period for appeal began to run on January 10. In view of this, the order of March 1, was a nullity.
TORBERT, C.J., concurs. *Page 975