Meier v. Social Sec. Administration, 29586
| Citation | 146 N.E.2d 239,237 Ind. 421 |
| Decision Date | 04 December 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 29586,29586 |
| Parties | Louis MEIER, Guardian of Grace Ethel Moyer, Appellant, v. SOCIAL SECUTIRY ADMINISTRATION, Paul Jones, Appellees. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
Louis Meier, Sullivan, for appellant.
Jack C. Brown, U. S. Atty., James L. Miller, Asst. U. S. Atty., Indianapolis, for appellees.
This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing appellant's action to recover social security money alleged to be due his ward, a person of unsound mind. Appellees have filed here a motion to dismiss the appeal.
On April 2, 1957, appellees filed in the trial court a motion to dismiss the cause of action. On April 22, 1957, the trial court entered a judgment dismissing the cause. There was no trial or hearing had on the motion to dismiss. Appellant next filed a motion for new trial, which was overruled on May 24, 1957. The transcript and assignment of errors was filed with our clerk August 23, 1957. No petition had ever been filed with us for an extension of time to perfect the appeal.
Rule 2-2 required this appeal to be perfected within 90 days from the date of judgment, unless time be extended pursuant to the rule. There had been no trial, so the motion for a new trial was a nullity. Tyler v. Bowlus, 1876, 54 Ind. 333; Vawter v. Gilliland, 1876, 55 Ind. 278; Galey v. Mason, 1910, 174 Ind. 158, 91 N.E. 561; Hughes v. Chicago, I. & L. R. Co., 1912, 50 Ind.App. 278, 98 N.E. 317; Dawson v. Wright, 1955, 234 Ind. 626, 129 N.E.2d 796. It could not serve to extend the time for perfecting the appeal.
The dismissal of a cause is a final judgment from which an appeal lies. Dawson v. Wright, 1955, 234 Ind. 626, 129 N.E.2d 796, supra. The failure to perfect the appeal within the time required by Rule 2-2 prevented this court from obtaining jurisdiction of the appeal. It should be dismissed. Dawson v. Wright, supra, and cases therein cited.
Appeal dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hogan v. Review Bd. of Indiana Dept. of Employment and Training Services
...Ind. 561, 563, 297 N.E.2d 807, 808 (emphasis supplied). prevented the court from "obtaining jurisdiction." Meier v. Social Sec. Admin., supra n. 2, 237 Ind. at 422, 146 N.E.2d at 240. II. Abolition of the Jurisdictional Perhaps realizing the dangerous course upon which it had embarked, our ......
-
Harding v. Brown, 867
...and such motion presents nothing for review. Wiltrout, Indiana Practice, Vol. 2, Sec. 1774, p. 545; Meier v. Social Security Administration et al. (1957) 237 Ind. 421, 146 N.E.2d 239; Dawson et al. v. Wright, Mayor of City of Anderson et al. (1955) 234 Ind. 626, 129 N.E.2d 796. Because the ......
-
Eggers v. Wright
...241 Ind. 338, 170 N.E.2d 424; Bowers et al. v. Thornburg et al. (1961), 242 Ind. 272, 177 N.E.2d 665; Meier, etc. v. Soc. Sec. Adm. et al. (1958), 237 Ind. 421, 146 N.E.2d 239; Higginson v. State (1957), 237 Ind. 256, 142 N.E.2d 435; Dawson et al. v. Wright, Mayor, etc., et al. (1955), 234 ......
-
Kapusta v. De Puy Mfg. Co.
...Schneidt v. Schneidt (1919), 69 Ind.App. 666, 667, 122 N.E. 588; where there is a dismissal of the cause, Meier, etc. v. Soc. Sec.Adm. et al. (1958), 237 Ind. 421, 422, 146 N.E.2d 239; and other situations not pertinent to the issue here. The practice seems to be to accept the introduction ......