Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Co. v. Farmer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “courts must consider the substance of the [post-trial] motion, rather than its form”
• holding that, for purposes of the time for filing a notice of appeal, a post-trial motion will be considered a Rule 59.04 motion based upon the motion’s substance rather than form
• holding that a motion under Rule 59.04 tolls the statute of limitations for filing a notice of appeal “until entry of an order granting or denying the motion”
• holding that while a motion to reconsider is not the type of motion that tolls the time for filing a notice of appeal, courts should avoid “an overly technical application of these rules” and consider such a motion under Rule 59.04
• noting that courts interpreting the effect of post-trial motions must “consider the substance of a post-trial motion, rather than its form[,]” and that appellate review is therefore not limited by the name a party gives its motions”
• “[W]e conclude that the ‘Motion to Reconsider’ . . . is in substance a Rule 59.04 motion to alter or amend. . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).