Blinn v. Dyer, No. 27A04–1403–SC–125.
| Docket Nº | No. 27A04–1403–SC–125. |
| Citation | 19 N.E.3d 821 |
| Case Date | October 31, 2014 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Indiana |
19 N.E.3d 821
Ed BLINN, Appellant–Defendant
v.
Mark DYER, Appellee–Plaintiff.
No. 27A04–1403–SC–125.
Court of Appeals of Indiana.
Oct. 31, 2014.
Morris Kelsay, Marion, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
OPINION
BAILEY, Judge.
Case Summary
Ed Blinn, Jr., doing business as Blinn Auto Sales (“Blinn”), appeals the small claims court's denial of his motion to correct error, which challenged the court's entry of judgment and award of $1,800 in damages to Mark Dyer (“Dyer”) for money Dyer paid under a layaway plan for purchase of a motorcycle from Blinn.
Concluding sua sponte that Blinn's appeal is untimely, we dismiss.
Facts and Procedural History
During May and June 2012, Dyer and Blinn negotiated for Dyer to purchase a motorcycle from Blinn under a layaway plan. Dyer paid $1,800 to Blinn, and agreed to perform work for Blinn as additional consideration for purchase of the motorcycle. A dispute eventually arose over the total purchase price for the motorcycle, and Dyer did not complete the purchase. Based upon a provision in a written layaway agreement, Blinn refused to refund any portion of the money to Dyer.
On May 3, 2013, Dyer filed suit against Blinn on the small claims docket of the Grant Superior Court. A hearing was conducted on August 15, 2013, at the conclusion of which the court found in favor of Dyer and stated that judgment would be entered against Blinn within seven days of the hearing if Blinn did not refund Dyer's money before that date. Blinn did not refund the money, and on September 5, 2013, the trial court entered a final judgment against Blinn.
On September 23, 2013, Blinn filed a motion to correct error. A hearing was conducted on the motion on October 17, 2013. On February 23, 2014, the trial
court entered an order denying the motion to correct error.
This appeal ensued.
Discussion and Decision
...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cannon v. Caldwell, Court of Appeals Case No. 89A01-1607-DR-1643
...and whether the right to appeal should be restored. Snyder v. Snyder , 62 N.E.3d 455, 458 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (citing Blinn v. Dyer , 19 N.E.3d 821, 822 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) ).7] Our Appellate Rules require that a party initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal within thirty days aft......
-
Snyder v. Snyder, No. 46A03–1510–DR–1792.
...party presents the timeliness of Husband's appeal as an issue, this court regularly addresses such issues sua sponte. See Blinn v. Dyer, 19 N.E.3d 821, 822 (Ind.Ct.App.2014). “Failure to timely file a notice of appeal, while not a jurisdictional matter, nevertheless forfeits the right to an......
-
Kreilein v. Berry, Court of Appeals Case No. 21A-PL-862
...and we may still consider an untimely initiated appeal if there are extraordinary compelling reasons to do so. Blinn v. Dyer , 19 N.E.3d 821, 822 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). However, no such extraordinary compelling reason is present...
-
Kroger Ltd. P'ship I v. Lomax, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-CT-1201
...a notice of appeal is not a jurisdictional defect. Id. (citing In re Adoption of O.R. , 16 N.E.3d 965, 971 (Ind. 2014) ; Blinn v. Dyer , 19 N.E.3d 821, 822 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) ). Even though the failure to timely file an appeal is not a jurisdictional matter, it acts to forfeit the right t......
-
Cannon v. Caldwell, Court of Appeals Case No. 89A01-1607-DR-1643
...and whether the right to appeal should be restored. Snyder v. Snyder , 62 N.E.3d 455, 458 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (citing Blinn v. Dyer , 19 N.E.3d 821, 822 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) ).7] Our Appellate Rules require that a party initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal within thirty days aft......
-
Snyder v. Snyder, 46A03–1510–DR–1792.
...party presents the timeliness of Husband's appeal as an issue, this court regularly addresses such issues sua sponte. See Blinn v. Dyer, 19 N.E.3d 821, 822 (Ind.Ct.App.2014). “Failure to timely file a notice of appeal, while not a jurisdictional matter, nevertheless forfeits the right to an......
-
Kreilein v. Berry, Court of Appeals Case No. 21A-PL-862
...and we may still consider an untimely initiated appeal if there are extraordinary compelling reasons to do so. Blinn v. Dyer , 19 N.E.3d 821, 822 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). However, no such extraordinary compelling reason is present...
-
Kroger Ltd. P'ship I v. Lomax, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-CT-1201
...a notice of appeal is not a jurisdictional defect. Id. (citing In re Adoption of O.R. , 16 N.E.3d 965, 971 (Ind. 2014) ; Blinn v. Dyer , 19 N.E.3d 821, 822 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) ). Even though the failure to timely file an appeal is not a jurisdictional matter, it acts to forfeit the right t......