Legal Opinion

Mullen v. Couch

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 18, 1986No. 85-235PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

David Newbern, Justice.

The question presented here is whether there is a limit on the time within which a court may grant a timely motion for a new trial. We hold that the trial court loses jurisdiction to rule on the motion ninety days after the judgment is filed with the clerk. Therefore, we reverse the court’s granting of the new trial motion on July 1,1985, with respect to a judgment filed February 4, 1985.

Ark. R. Civ. P. 59 is devoted to the subject of the new trial motion, and it contains short limits on moving for and responding to the motion for a new trial after a judgment. No…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Smith v. BooneSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
  2. Jones v. Circuit CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1977

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Phillips v. Jacobs Ex Rel. JacobsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  2. Diebold v. Myers General Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1987
  3. City of Little Rock v. RaganSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
  4. Scott v. KiddSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1987
  5. Gibson v. CrainCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1986

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API