Court Opinion

ID: 9663690
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 23:48:06.848376+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:55.173887
License: Public Domain

REYNOLDSON, Justice
(dissenting.)
In this case the jury entered a verdict for plaintiff Helland, driver of the semitrailer rig owned by plaintiffs Stromen and Doughboy. Judgment was entered promptly on the jury verdict for Helland.
Within seven days plaintiffs Stromen and Doughboy moved to “Augment Verdict” as to them for the stipulated damages to their personal property. No separate acts of contributory negligence were alleged as to these two movants.
Thereafter the trial court, with respect to the motion of these plaintiffs for addi-tur, “ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for additur be sustained, and the amounts shown in the foregoing item ‘B’ he added to verdict and resxilting judgment.” (Em phasis added.)
This was without question a ministerial nunc pro tunc addition to a judgment already entered.
*607Defendants appealed from this amendment to judgment on June 18, 1971, and the matter of this court’s jurisdiction has not been raised by either Stromen or Doughboy.
It is doubtful the question of jurisdiction would have been raised on this court’s own motion except that someone, out of an excess of caution, caused trial court to enter a “Supplemental Judgment” on June 28, 1971, following which there was no additional notice of appeal.
All parties here obviously considered the Order of June 4, 1971 a final adjudication appealable as a matter of right. It rightly should be so considered under the rationale laid down by this court in Flynn v. Lucas County Memorial Hospital, et al., 203 N.W.2d 613 (1973).
I therefore dissent from division I of the opinion and would hold that the real issues' there involved should be decided by this court.
UHLENHOPP and HARRIS, JJ., join this dissent.