Court Opinion

ID: 9846579
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 03:43:56.601127+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:39.364105
License: Public Domain

OP ALA, Justice,
concurring in result.
The court correctly concludes today that this appeal, lodged here on January 10,1994, is too late for review of the nisi prius judgment, whose written memorial was entered below September 21, 1993, and too early for corrective relief from the trial court’s still-unmemorialized December 10,1993 denial of appellant’s postjudgment petition to vacate (judgment).
Unlike the court, I would dismiss this appeal as abandoned by appellant’s failure to *1342comply with this court’s January 19, 199k order. There, we directed her to cure the fatal infirmity by securing a journal entry of the postjudgment ruling to be reviewed and depositing it in this court as an attachment to her “supplemental” petition in error within 30 days of the date the critical memorial of the postjudgment ruling is filed below, but in no event “later than February 16, 1994.”
Because this uneounseled appellant ignored, the court’s direction, her appeal should be dismissed. Blessing v. Purdum, 205 Okl. 379, 238 P.2d 313, 314 (1951); Smith v. Smith, Okl., 463 P.2d 971, 972 (1969). Law-yerless litigants are held to the same standards of skills competence as those which apply to licensed legal practitioners. Funnell v. Jones, Okl., 737 P.2d 105, 107 (1987).