Court Opinion

ID: 9585991
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:06:08.397388+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:24:18.497572
License: Public Domain

Weltner, Justice,
dissenting.
I am in total agreement with the majority that the appellate procedures of our State must be structured and interpreted “to protect the integrity of the trial courts in their efforts to do substantial justice and discourage races to the courthouse for the purpose of playing legal slapjack with notices and motions.”
I dissent because by our judgment in this case we have accomplished the very opposite of what we solemnly declare our goal to be. In so doing, we have deprived the trial judge of his traditional authority to consider a timely motion for new trial on discretionary grounds — which only the trial judge may grant — and, more importantly, we have deprived a party of its right to have that motion so considered upon its merits.