Bell v. Wabash Valley Trust Co., 2--872A46

• Decision Date: 20 December 1972
• Docket Number: No. 2--872A46,2--872A46
• Citation: 290 N.E.2d 454,154 Ind.App. 575
• Parties: Hallmon BELL et al., Appellants, v. WABASH VALLEY TRUST COMPANY, as Trustee under the Will of Alison Bell, Deceased, et al., Appellees.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

Page 454

290 N.E.2d 454

154 Ind.App. 575

Hallmon BELL et al., Appellants, v. WABASH VALLEY TRUST COMPANY, as Trustee under the Will of

Alison Bell, Deceased, et al., Appellees.

No. 2--872A46.

Court of Appeals of Indiana, Second District.

Dec. 20, 1972.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 26, 1973.

Robert S. Justice, Logansport, for appellants.

Russel J. Wildman, Peru, John M. Baumunk, Brazil, Patrick J. Roberts, Cole, Haig & Roberts, Peru, for appellees.

ON APPELLEES' MOTION TO DISMISS AND FORFEIT APPEAL

PER CURIAM.

This cause is pending before the Court on the appellees' Motion to Dismiss and Forfeit Appeal, appellants' Brief Opposing appellees' Motion, Affidavit in Support of Appellants' Response, and appellees' Brief in Response to Appellants' Brief Opposing Appellees' Motion to Dismiss.

The appellees' Motion alleges as cause therefor that the appellants did not file any praecipe with the clerk of the trial court within thirty days after the court's ruling on the motion to correct errors. We have examined the record and find appellees' contention to be correct, as the motion to correct errors was overruled on May 24, 1972, but the praecipe was not filed until August 18, 1972, eighty-six days after the ruling on the motion to correct errors. The record of the proceedings was also filed on August 18 with the Clerk of this Court without may request for extension of time having been requested or granted.

Appellants make two arguments in response to appellees' motion. The first is that the record of the proceedings and appellants' brief were prematurely filed because the judgment being appealed involved multiple claims and multiple parties, and the court did not make an express determination that there was no just reason for delay and expressly direct the entry of judgment on less than all of the claims, all as required by Trial Rule 54(B), IC 1971, 34--5--1--1, therefore the trial court's judgment which is the subject of this appeal was not a final, appealable judgment.

Appellants' second argument is that the litigation of which this appeal is a part began in 1967, and to apply Rule AP. 2 as amended effective April 1, 1972, deprives petitioners of two months time they would have had under the rules in the order form and works an injustice by depriving petitioners of their appeal. Appellants further argue that while appellees' claim that appellants have forfeited their right to appeal by not filing a praecipe within thirty days after the ruling of the motion to correct errors, that forfeitures are not favored by the courts, and will be avoided if possible.

Appellees' Response is twofold: First, appellees assert that the judgment being appealed was final and disposed of all claims and parties, and secondly, that rule AP. 2 was amended November 30, 1971, effective April 1, 1972, which gave appellants six months to become acquainted with the rule, and that it is the duty of this Court to enforce the rules.

The record of the proceedings herein reveals that this cause was originally initiated as an action to terminate a certain trust, which resulted in an appeal to the Appellate Court with transfer to the Supreme Court denied. The current appeal now before us was submitted and tried in the trial court on the trustee's amended and supplemental final reports and objections thereto. After trial, the court entered its judgment on March 10, 1972, sustaining the objections in part and ordered the trustee to amend its final report. Appellants thereafter filed their motion to correct errors which was granted in part and overruled in part, and this appeal followed.

A judgment rendered by a court on a trustee's statement is, subject to the right of appeal, final, conclusive and binding upon all parties to the action who are subject to the jurisdiction of the court. Ind.Stat.Ann. § 31--1715 (1972 Supp.) (IC 30--4--5--15). The appellants were parties, who had submitted to the jurisdiction of the court,...