Court Opinion

ID: 9604317
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 02:19:45.183414+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:21.051179
License: Public Domain

*167BERRY, Vice Chief Justice
(dissenting) :
My dissent to the majority opinion is upon the basis the purported appeal was not lodged within time and this Court never acquired jurisdiction of the cause.
The statute, 12 O.S. 1961, § 698, was construed in Stillwater Milling Co. v. First National Bank, Okl., 391 P.2d 807, wherein function of the motion was considered. There we stated the effect of such motion simply invoked the trial court’s consideration as to whether there was evidence upon which to base a verdict, or judgment. Neither reason nor authority can be offered to support the proposition that after motion for new trial and motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict, have been presented and overruled a subsequent motion of identical tenor performs any function. It is my opinion the statute, supra, was not intended and cannot properly be construed as a vehicle for extending time for appeal.
The majority affirms the trial court. This I would accomplish by dismissing the appeal on jurisdictional grounds.
I am authorized to state that Me-INERNEY, J., concurs in the views herein expressed.