Theresa Hines v. David Hines (2011)

ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION

This court has carefully reviewed on an ex parte basis the Motion for Clarification filed by the defendant on April 6, 2010.¹  The court has also carefully reviewed the written memorandum of decision that it issued on September 25, 2009.   The court finds that it inadvertently used the word “defendant” in lieu of the word “plaintiff” in the last sentence of paragraph 3 of the orders of the court.   Accordingly, the last sentence of paragraph 3 of the Orders shall read as follows:  “In that event, the sum of $20,250, shall be deducted from the fifty percent share of the net proceeds that the plaintiff receives from the sale of that corporation.”   Other than the foregoing rectification, the court finds that its memorandum of decision and orders, and specifically its order that the defendant pay the plaintiff the sum of $20,250 within 30 days of September 25, 2009, to be clear and unambiguous.   Accordingly, except for the correction of the scrivener's error, the Defendant's Motion for Clarification filed April 6, 2010 ² is hereby DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT,

Dyer, J.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. Although this motion was filed with the clerk on April 6, 2010, this court was unaware of its existence until March 21, 2011, when a copy of the motion was forwarded to the undersigned as the trial court for action.   The last page of the motion contains the following handwritten notation which was ostensibly written by a representative of the clerk's office:  “spoke to Atty Kiefer.   No action to be taken on this motion until further notification from counsel.”.  FN1. Although this motion was filed with the clerk on April 6, 2010, this court was unaware of its existence until March 21, 2011, when a copy of the motion was forwarded to the undersigned as the trial court for action.   The last page of the motion contains the following handwritten notation which was ostensibly written by a representative of the clerk's office:  “spoke to Atty Kiefer.   No action to be taken on this motion until further notification from counsel.”

FN2. The court only addresses that portion of the motion which requests clarification by the original trier of fact.   This court is not entertaining, or acting upon, other portions of the April 6, 2010 motion that request other relief..  FN2. The court only addresses that portion of the motion which requests clarification by the original trier of fact.   This court is not entertaining, or acting upon, other portions of the April 6, 2010 motion that request other relief.

Dyer, Richard W., J.