Legal Opinion
Hepp v. Hammer
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided February 22, 1983No. 4-582A111PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON REHEARING
CONOVER, Judge.
The Hepps filed a petition for rehearing after our original opinion in this case was filed, cf. Hepp v. Hammer, (1982) Ind.App., 439 N.E.2d 735. There we dismissed the appeal due to lack of jurisdiction. It appeared the Hepps had filed both their motion to correct errors and original praecipe for record one day too late. When the Hepps’ petition for rehearing indicated their motion to correct errors and praecipe for transcript might have been timely filed by their deposit as certified mail on the last day for filing, we gave the Hepps authority to withdraw…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Skolnick v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1979
- In Re PerryIndiana Court of Appeals · 1925
- Robinson v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
- Sturgis v. RogersIndiana Supreme Court · 1866
- Hepp v. HammerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rose v. Mercantile National Bank of HammondIndiana Court of Appeals · 2006
- Swain v. SwainIndiana Court of Appeals · 1991
- City of Salem, Board of Zoning Appeals v. AlexanderIndiana Court of Appeals · 2001
- Newman v. Worcester County Department of Social ServicesIndiana Court of Appeals · 1995