Court Opinion

ID: 9529128
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:47:52.525562+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:41.439731
License: Public Domain

CONCURRING OPINION
Garrard, J.
While I believe the overlap between TR. 59 and TR. 60(B) is even more pervasive than Judge Staton indicates, the chief problem arising is the pleading trap created by the requirement that a motion to correct errors be addressed to a ruling on a TR. 60(B) motion. See, Yerkes v. Washington Mfg. Co. (1975), 163 Ind. App. 692, 326 N.E.2d 629.
*515Judge Staton solves that problem by treating all motions filed within sixty days after the entry of judgment as TR. 59 motions.
Furthermore, his solution does not deprive litigants of the evidentiary hearing procedures afforded under TR. 60(D) where the court has granted either a default judgment or an involuntary dismissal since the rules applicable to such rulings specifically permit use of TR. 60 (B) procedures. See, TR. 41(F), TR. 55(C).
I therefore concur.