Veteto v. Yocum
| Citation | 794 So.2d 1117 |
| Parties | Ronald D. VETETO v. John C. YOCUM. |
| Decision Date | 14 April 2000 |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Ronald D. Veteto, appellant, pro se.
Submitted on appellant's brief only.
Ronald D. Veteto sued John C. Yocum in the Escambia County District Court. On May 14, 1999, when neither party appeared for the trial, the district court dismissed the action. Veteto filed several motions after the dismissal. He filed a motion for new trial on May 20, 1999, and, while that postjudgment motion was pending, filed a notice of appeal to the circuit court on June 1, 1999. The circuit court dismissed Veteto's appeal on September 23, 1999, stating that the appeal was either premature because Veteto's postjudgment motions were pending or untimely because it was not filed within 14 days of the district court's judgment. Veteto appeals. We reverse.
Veteto's postjudgment motion was filed within 14 days of the district court's judgment of dismissal, as required by Rule 59(dc), Ala. R. Civ. P. The district court had 14 days to rule on that motion; because the court did not rule on the motion within 14 days, the motion was deemed denied by operation of law on June 3, 1999. See Rule 59.1(dc), Ala. R. Civ. P. Veteto had 14 days after the denial of his postjudgment motion to appeal the judgment. Ala.Code 1975, § 12-12-70(a). Veteto filed his notice of appeal early, on June 1. The circuit court was incorrect in concluding that Veteto's notice of appeal was untimely.
The circuit court also based its judgment on the prematurity of the notice of appeal. We must determine whether the prematurity of Veteto's notice of appeal was an appropriate basis for dismissal. The Rules of Appellate Procedure clearly address how this court must treat notices of appeal filed while postjudgment motions are pending. See Rule 4(a)(5), Ala. R.App. P. ().
Before the rules were changed to address the problem, however, the filing of a notice of appeal by the party whose postjudgment motion was pending in the trial court resulted in the withdrawal of that party's postjudgment motion. See Herring v. Shirah, 542 So.2d 271, 273 (Ala. 1988)
. The supreme court explained that it had two options in a case in which a party had filed a postjudgment motion and then, before the postjudgment motion was ruled upon, filed an appeal: "treat the notice of appeal as a withdrawal of the post-judgment motion" or "conclude that the notice of appeal has no force or effect until after the post-judgment motion is ruled upon." Herring, 542 So.2d at 272. As the court further explained, if the latter option were adopted, the party would have to file a new notice of appeal after the postjudgment motion was ruled upon or else lose the right to appeal. Id. The court decided to avoid the harsh result of the second option and chose instead...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thompson v. State ex rel. Jett
...of a father's Rule 60(b) motion in a juvenile court did not effectuate the withdrawal of the Rule 60(b) motion:"In Veteto v. Yocum, 794 So. 2d 1117 (Ala. Civ. App. 2000), this court considered what effect the filing of a notice of appeal from a district-court judgment would have if the dist......
-
Veteto v. Yocum
...on appellant's brief only. CRAWLEY, Judge. This is the third time these parties have been before this court. See Veteto v. Yocum, 794 So.2d 1117 (Ala.Civ.App.2000) ("Veteto I"), and Veteto v. Yocum, 792 So.2d 1117 (Ala.Civ.App.2001) ("Veteto II"). In June 1999, Ronald D. Veteto, an inmate i......
-
Williams v. Mari Props., LLC
...withdrawn upon the filing of the notice of appeal, and jurisdiction immediately vests in the circuit court. See Veteto v. Yocum, 794 So. 2d 1117 (Ala. Civ. App. 2000). Thus, the filing of the notice of appeal on October 9, 2019, served to withdraw Mari's motion to vacate filed on October 8,......
-
J.S.W. v. J.L.P. (Ex parte J.L.P.)
...to the Cullman Circuit Court ("the circuit court"), which docketed the father's appeal as case number DR–15–269. In Veteto v. Yocum, 794 So.2d 1117 (Ala. Civ. App. 2000), this court considered what effect the filing of a notice of appeal from a district-court judgment would have if the dist......