Time for service and filing of notice of appeal
Source:
Section 19.255 — Time for service and filing of notice of appeal, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors019.html.
Notes of Decisions
Where clerk neglected to timely enter final judgment on register, entry of judgment nunc pro tunc was effective to cure premature filing of appeal. Turlay v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 259 Or 612, 488 P2d 406 (1971)
A motion to reduce the amount of attorney fees awarded by the court upon default is in the nature of a request for rehearing and must be filed prior to the date the decree becomes final. Lowe v. Institutional Investors Trust, 270 Or 814, 529 P2d 920 (1974)
A motion for a new trial in a writ of review proceeding had no bearing on the time within which a notice of appeal was filed under this section. Tierney v. Duris, 21 Or App 604, 536 P2d 431 (1975)
In equity case reviewed de novo, where defendant appeals from only portion of decree, and plaintiff fails to file notice of appeal or to cross-appeal, plaintiff cannot raise other objections to trial court’s decree. Williams v. Mallory, 284 Or 397, 587 P2d 85 (1978)
Filing of request for proposed specific findings of fact does not toll time period for filing appeal. Fox & Sons Construction Co. v. Carlton, 42 Or App 689, 601 P2d 835 (1979)
In contract action, order denying stay pending appraiser’s valuation precluded appraisal but not judicial action, and thus was not “judgment” within meaning of [former] ORS 19.010 subject to 30-day appeal limit under this section. Budget Rent-A-Car v. Todd Investment Co., 43 Or App 519, 603 P2d 1199 (1979)
For purpose of this section, extending time for filing notice of appeal, defendant’s motion and requested instruction on punitive damages was sufficient to support motion for judgment n.o.v. Crooks v. Payless Drug Stores, 285 Or 481, 592 P2d 196 (1979)
Decree was not final and appealable, so as to require dismissal of appeal not filed within 30 days under this section, where, inter alia, decree provided that court retained jurisdiction of matter until escrow was closed, plaintiff could apply to court for supplemental decree transferring deed if defendant failed to execute it or escrow instructions, and decision on award of attorney fees was reserved until review. David M. Scott Construction v. Farrell, 285 Or 563, 592 P2d 551 (1979)
Time for filing notice of appeal is to be computed from date of clerk’s entry of judgment in journal pursuant to [former] ORS 18.030. Blackledge v. Harrington, 289 Or 139, 611 P2d 292 (1980)
Motions for reconsideration or to vacate and set aside judgment were not appealable orders and do not extend time for filing an appeal. Credit Bureau v. Marshall, 53 Or App 46, 630 P2d 910 (1981)
When clerk of court docketed judgment in judgment docket, which had been consolidated with the journal, that act constituted “entry of the judgment” within meaning of this section. Henson and Henson, 61 Or App 210, 656 P2d 345 (1982)
Where judgment is amended, time for filing appeal commences on date of amendment if rights or obligations determined under original decree are materially altered or additional appeal right is created. Mullinax and Mullinax, 292 Or 416, 639 P2d 628 (1982); State v. Christopherson, 159 Or App 428, 978 P2d 1039 (1999); Ramis Crew Corrigan & Bachrach, LLP v. Stoelk, 193 Or App 700, 92 P3d 154 (2004)
Motion for reconsideration of trial court’s final order does not extend time for filing notice of appeal under this section. Portello and Portello, 62 Or App 475, 660 P2d 1098 (1983)
If order disposing of motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict is entered before judgment, time limit for appeal following denial of motion does not have effect of shortening time for appeal following entry of judgment. Yarbrough v. The Oregon Bank, 64 Or App 370, 668 P2d 451 (1983)
“Motion to reconsider,” although treated as motion for new trial, did not toll running of appeal period under this section because motion was improper under ORCP 64F, having been filed more than 10 days after judgment. Schmidling v. Dove, 65 Or App 1, 670 P2d 166 (1983)
Procedural distinction between law and equity having been abolished, “motion for reconsideration” seeks same ruling contemplated by motion for new trial and can toll appeal period. Schmidling v. Dove, 65 Or App 1, 670 P2d 166 (1983)
Clerk’s failure to notify counsel of entry of judgment does not create exception to this section. Junction City Water Control v. Elliot, 65 Or App 548, 672 P2d 59 (1983); Amvesco, Inc. v. Key Title Co., 69 Or App 740, 687 P2d 1121 (1984); U.S. National Bank v. Heggemeier, 106 Or App 693, 810 P2d 396 (1991)
Motion for reconsideration to the tax court is not analogous to motion for new trial and does not have the effect of suspending 30 day period within which appeals must be taken. Multistate Tax Comm. v. Dow Chemical Co, 295 Or 831, 671 P2d 108 (1983)
Extended filing period for appeal from denial of motion for new trial applies to appeal from summary judgment. Scheid v. Harvey, 73 Or App 481, 698 P2d 991 (1985)
Because clerk failed to date entry, there was no basis to determine date of entry of order and therefore nothing to determine when appeal time began to run under this section. Simpson v. Simpson, 299 Or 578, 704 P2d 509 (1985)
“Entry of judgment” under this section refers to entry in journal and, in absence of journal, 30-day period runs from date of entry in judgment docket. Gordon v. Schumaker, 77 Or App 435, 713 P2d 658 (1986)
Where trial court entered supplemental judgment allowing plaintiff’s costs, disbursements and attorney fees and defendant, more than 30 days after entry of supplemental judgment, filed motion for relief from default and amended notice of appeal from supplemental judgment, motion was properly denied because 30-day time limit for filing notices of appeals set by this section applies and court was without authority to extend it. Jansen v. Atiyeh, 302 Or 314, 728 P2d 1382 (1986)
Where court’s review involved only issues of law, motion for new trial did not toll time for appeal. Alt v. City of Salem, 86 Or App 627, 740 P2d 216 (1987), aff’d 306 Or 80, 756 P2d 637 (1988)
Order granting motion to set aside summary judgment is an appealable judgment or decree and is equivalent to order granting “new trial” within statute allowing appeal from order setting aside judgment granting new trial. Carter v. U.S. National Bank, 304 Or 538, 747 P2d 980 (1987)
This section does not by its terms extend time to appeal when “motion for reconsideration” has been filed and any document not clearly labeled as motion for new trial or judgment notwithstanding verdict will not extend 30-day period for filing notice of appeal under this section. Alternative Realty v. Michaels, 90 Or App 280, 753 P2d 419 (1988)
Where court issues order granting new trial, subsequent entry of judgment does not extend time for filing appeal from order that disposed of motion. E.A. Mock & Sons, Inc. v. Mehdizadehkashi, 91 Or App 453, 755 P2d 739 (1988)
Order by tax court dismissing complaint does not itself commence time in which notice of appeal must be filed because that time commences upon entry of judgment in register. NW Medical Lab. v. Good Samaritan Hospital, 307 Or 448, 770 P2d 905 (1989); NW Medical Lab. v. Healthlink, 307 Or 455, 770 P2d 908 (1989)
Filing of notice of appeal before entry of final judgment on register does not comply with time limit for filing appeal and is therefore ineffective. S. W. v. Schellenberg, 152 Or App 33, 952 P2d 567 (1998)
Notice of appeal filed before time to appeal commences is jurisdictionally defective. Welker v. Teacher Standards and Practices Commission, 332 Or 306, 27 P3d 1038 (2001)
Where notice of appeal is filed prematurely, appellate court has jurisdiction to decide merits of appeal without first requiring filing of new notice of appeal if, when initial notice of appeal was filed, trial court intended to enter an appealable judgment. Association of Unit Owners of Timbercrest Condominiums v. Warren, 242 Or App 425, 256 P3d 146 (2011), aff’d 352 Or 583, 288 P3d 859 (2012)
If summary judgment ruling does not examine issue of fact in way that constitutes “trial” under ORCP 64, plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of summary judgment ruling under this section does not constitute “motion for new trial.” Association of Unit Owners of Timbercrest Condominiums v. Warren, 352 Or 583, 288 P3d 859 (2012)
Law Review Citations
51 OLR 652 (1972)
Up to date