Court Opinion

ID: 9793520
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:48:59.070437+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:05:48.851827
License: Public Domain

GOODMAN, P.J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
¶ 1 The trial court filed the Order of Dismissal in this matter October 16, 1998. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed his Motion to Reconsider November 12, 1998, within thirty (30) days from the date the Order of Dismissal was filed. The Motion to Reconsider requested leave to amend the plaintiffs petition to include an allegation that “oral herpes was a ‘dangerous disease.’ ” The Petition in Error was timely filed November 16, 1998. Pursuant to 12 O.S. Supp.1998, § 1031.1, on a motion made not later than thirty (30) days after a judgment is filed, the court may correct, open, modify, or vacate the judgment, decree, or appealable order. As he was required to do, the plaintiff notified this court in his Petition in Error that his Motion to Reconsider was pending in the trial court. 12 O.S. Supp.1998, § 990.2(B). However, he has not advised us of any action the trial court may have taken regarding the motion, which § 990.2(B) also requires him to do. As noted in the Oklahoma Comments to amended § 990.2:
Even though a post-trial motion filed more than 10 days after the filing of the judgment does not affect the time for commencing an appeal from the judgment, it may affect the judgment, and so the appellant is required to notify the. Supreme Court of the disposition of these motions. (Emphasis added.)
¶ 2 I generally agree with the court’s analysis of this appeal. However, if the trial court permitted the plaintiff to amend his petition, that analysis could be radically altered. Therefore, I would issue an order directing the plaintiff to advise us of the disposition of his post-trial motion. Further, I do not believe we can render an opinion in this case until we know the effect of such disposition on the judgment appealed.