id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentence	flesch	summary	cache	txt
inlawrev-3305	Wilkins, Michael A.; Blaiklock, A. Richard M.	Indiana Appellate Procedure in 1997	1998	26	.pdf	application/pdf	12614	795	66	The main issue presented in Marshall was whether the failure of an appellant to personally serve the trial judge with a motion to correct errors, as mandated by Indiana Trial Rule 59(C), serves as an excuse^^ to the self-executing thirty-day time limitation to rule on a motion to correct errors'^ when the trial judge, despite not being personally served with a copy of the motion, has actual knowledge of its existence.^^ The court in Marshall first set forth a concise statement of the law interpreting the procedural interplay between Appellate Rule 2(A) and Indiana Trial Rule 53.3(A): Indiana Appellate Rule 2(A) requires that every party seeking an appeal must first file a praecipe within thirty days ofthe entry of final judgment. In particular, the issue in Marshall was whether the same procedures apply to motions to correct errors filed in small claims courts as in Indiana trial courts.	cache/inlawrev-3305.pdf	txt/inlawrev-3305.txt