Court Opinion

ID: 9714113
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:31:02.202366+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:23.565031
License: Public Domain

STATON, Judge,
concurring in result.
I concur in result for a somewhat different and more simplified reason than the Majority. The factual posture here is as follows:
1. Final judgment had been entered January 24,1997.
2. Later, a pleading was filed January 30, 1997 by Mother which had to be considered a motion to correct error.
3. The trial court ruled on the motion to correct error the same day it was filed.
4. Ind. Trial Rule 59(E) provides that the Father had fifteen (15) days after service of the motion to respond.
5. Father had no time to respond before the ruling.
Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion when it failed to follow Ind. Trial Rule 59(E). It should have withheld its ruling until Father responded or the fifteen days had expired.