Maryland Lumber Co. v. Legum

Collins, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal by The Maryland Lumber Company from a judgment for costs rendered in favor of Harry ⁴⁸⁵ S. Legum, appellee. The case was tried before the trial judge without a jury. Judgment was entered in this case on July 12, 1950.

On July 14, 1950, the appellant filed a motion for a judgment n.o.v. or in the alternative for a new trial. This motion was denied on September 29, 1950. Appellant filed its order for appeal from the judgment on October 26, 1950. The appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal to this Court because the order for appeal was not filed within thirty days after the date of entry of the final judgment.

A motion for a judgment n.o.v. has no place in a trial before the court without a jury. Harris v. Kirshner, 194 Md. 139, 147 , 70 A. 2d 47, 50 . Of course, it has been stated many times by this Court that the action of the trial judge in granting or refusing a motion for a new trial is not appealable to this Court. O’Donnell v. State, 188 Md. 693, 699 , 53 A. 2d 688 , 54 A. 2d 315 .

Rule 2 of the Court of Appeals provides: “All appeals, or Writs of Error, allowed from any judgment or determination of a Court of Law, to the Court of Appeals of this State, other than from decisions on questions arising under the Insolvent Law, shall be taken within thirty days from the date of such judgment or determination, and not afterwards; and the transcript of the record shall be transmitted to the Court of Appeals within sixty days from the time of the appeal taken, or Writ of Error Allowed.” This thirty day rule did not apply to appeals from decisions or determinations or rulings of a court of law in cases of issues sent from the Orphans’ Court to a court of law to be tried, to the Court of Appeals until amended by us after Grant v. Curtin, 194 Md. 363, 368-369 , 71 A. 2d 304, 306 . Appellant claims that when a judgment is entered and then a motion for a new trial is filed, the thirty days within which the appeal shall be taken is suspended and the thirty days should date from the time of the ruling on the motion for the new trial and not from the date of the entry of the judgment. Among other cases, it ⁴⁸⁶ relies, on the case of Harris v. Kirshner, supra. In that, case a judgment was entered against Kirshner for $800.00.

A motion for a judgment n.o.v. or for a new trial was made by Kirshner. The judgment n.o.v: was granted and judgment entered in favor of Kirshner for costs, and from that judgment the appellant appealed. Although the appeal to this Court was not entered within thirty days from the date of the original judgment, it was entered within thirty days from the final judgment. The case of Snyder v. Cearfoss, 186 Md. 360 , 46 A. 2d 607 , relied on by the appellant, involved two jury cases.

Motions for new trials were filed in each case before judgments were entered and heard on June 23, 1945. On September 14, 1945, the court signed an order granting new trials and from that order the appeals were taken. In that case we held that the action of a trial court in granting a motion for a new trial was not appealable. The appeal in that case was from the order granting