Court Opinion

ID: 9677284
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:48:22.098601+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:54.958636
License: Public Domain

Richard B. Adkisson, Chief Justice, dissenting. The majority has held that in a non-jury trial a party can raise the issue of the sufficiency of the evidence for the first time on appeal. I cannot agree. In a jury trial a party who fails to question the sufficiency of the evidence in a motion for a new trial waives his right to do so on appeal. Rule 50 (e), ARCP, Ark. Stat. Ann., Vol. 3A (Repl. 1979); Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Short, 75 Ark. 345, 87 S.W. 640 (1905). This rule is equally applicable to non-jury trials. See Doup v. Almand, 212 Ark. 687, 207 S.W.2d 601 (1948). Rule 59 (a), ARCP, Ark. Stat. Ann., Vol. 3A (Repl. 1979), lists insufficient evidence as a basis for a motion for a new trial and states: On a motion for a new trial in an action tried without a jury, the court may open the judgment if one has been entered, take additional testimony, amend findings of fact and conclusions of law or make new findings and conclusions, and direct the entry of a new judgment. It is clear from this language that the sufficiency of the evidence may be raised in a motion for a new trial in non-jury trials. We have repeatedly held that this Court will not consider error raised for the first time on appeal. Wicks v. State, 270 Ark. 781, 606 S.W.2d 366 (1980).