Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | May 8, 2024

Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals

Division I

Division II

Division III

121,037 – Jimmy Lee West Revocable Trust Dated February 25, 2002, by Successor Trustee Paul C. Kallenberger, Plaintiff/Appellee, v.Kyle Lee West, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Deborah Ludi Leitch, Trial Judge. In this forcible entry and detainer action, the trial court granted possession of the property to the Plaintiff when the defendant failed to timely assert a claim of title. Defendant’s answer was filed late, and after an evidentiary hearing judgment was granted to Plaintiff. Defendant was ordered to file the FED order and mail a file-stamped copy to Plaintiff, but he did not do so. It was eventually filed and Defendant claims he did not receive a copy. A motion for new trial was unsuccessful. Another Motion For New Trial was unsuccessful and this appeal followed. Because of Plaintiff’s failure to timely appeal from the FED order the Supreme Court held appellate review was unavailable for that order. The only issue now on appeal is the denial of the motion for new trial. We affirm the denial of the motion for new trial because it was filed 215 days after the FED order was filed. Title O.S. 2021 §1148.10 only allows three days in which to file a motion for new trial. Finding no abuse of discretion, we AFFIRM. Opinion by MITCHELL, P.J.; GOREE, J., and DOWNING, J., concur. May 3, 2024

Division IV

119,650 (Companion with Case No. 120.591) – Valley Pointe, LLC, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. Taylor Ranch, LLC, Defendant/Appellee. Appeal from Order of District Court of Cleveland County, Hon. Wallace Coppedge, Trial Judge. In this action of specific performance of a right of first refusal in the parties’ land purchase contract, Appellant Valley Pointe, LLC appeals the judgment of the district court in favor of Appellee Taylor Ranch, LLC, and the order denying Valley Pointe’s motion for new trial. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court’s findings of fact are not against the weight of the evidence. Further, Valley Pointe has failed to show any error of law in either the district court’s judgment or its order denying Valley Pointe’s motion for new trial. The judgment in favor of Taylor Ranch is affirmed. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by FISCHER, J.; WISEMAN, P.J., and BARNES, C.J., concur. May 6, 2024