Court Opinion

ID: 9523758
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:46:32.139044+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:07:35.800993
License: Public Domain

STATON, Presiding Judge,
concurring.
While I agree with the majority that the trial court had jurisdiction because the transcript was timely filed, I believe that the theory of relation back coupled with the theory of jurisdiction over the particular case better supports this position. As the majority states, the Commission's failure to object allowed the trial court to maintain jurisdiction even though a showing of good cause did not appear on the first two motions requesting time extensions. Therefore, the third motion which contained a proper statement of good cause related back to the proper filing time. Because the relation back theory cures any error which may have occurred and because the trial court did not set a time limit for filing the transcript, it was timely filed approximately two weeks after the trial court had granted the third time extension. See In*420diana Civil Rights Commission v. Holman (1978), 177 Ind.App. 648, 380 N.E.2d 1281.