Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Sept. 14, 2022
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division II
119,596 (Companion with Case No. 119,034) — First Christian Church of Blackwell, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company, an Indiana Corporation, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from an order of the District Court of Kay County, Hon. David R. Bandy, Trial Judge. Defendant Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company appeals from the trial court’s order awarding Plaintiff First Christian Church of Blackwell attorney fees, costs, and interest after judgment entered on a jury verdict. We have examined the record to determine whether the trial court erred in granting Church attorney fees, costs and prejudgment interest as the prevailing party pursuant to 36 O.S. Supp. 2020 § 3629. Although Church is entitled to expert witness costs, they are reduced in conformity with our Opinion. We affirm the trial court’s award of prejudgment interest. Although we conclude Church is entitled to attorney fees, because the trial court’s computation of the fees has not been made, we must reverse and remand this issue to the trial court with directions to set forth with specificity its calculations, including which duplicate billing it disallowed, the number of attorney and/or staff hours it approved, the applicable hourly rates for the hours approved, and any other reduction or disallowance used to reach its award. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by WISEMAN, P.J.; BLACKWELL, J., and FISCHER, C.J. (sitting by designation), concur. Sept. 12, 2022
118,885 – Midfirst Bank, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. Andy Alexander and Shauna Alexander, Defendants/Appellants, and Joel Wineland and Scott Newcomb, Intervenors/Appellees. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of Garvin County, Hon. Leah Edwards, Trial Judge. The defendants, Andy and Shauna Alexander, bring this appeal after the trial court denied their motions to vacate a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Midfirst Bank, and to vacate orders allowing two parties to intervene and impress judgment liens against the excess proceeds of the sale of the realty at issue. The Alexanders claim that the district court was without jurisdiction when it issued the default judgment because Midfirst Bank failed to serve them with an amended petition in accordance with § 2005 of our pleading code. The Alexanders further claim that the court improperly sustained motions to intervene because the Alexanders were not served with the motions, nor were they allowed twenty days to respond to the order pursuant to § 2024(C) of the code. We find that although Midfirst did not properly serve their amended petition, the denial of the request to vacate the default judgment was proper, that intervenors were not required to serve the Alexanders with their motions to intervene because the Alexanders were in default, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in relation to the twenty-day time period referenced in § 2024(C). Accordingly, the trial court’s order is affirmed in all respects. AFFIRMED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by BLACKWELL, J.; BARNES, J., concurs, and WISEMAN, P.J., dissents. Sept. 2, 2022