Curbello v. Vaughn, 76 N.M. 687, 417 P.2d 881 (1966)

Sept. 6, 1966 · Supreme Court of New Mexico · No. 7782
76 N.M. 687, 417 P.2d 881

417 P.2d 881

Iva Lee CURBELLO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Vivian Margarite VAUGHN, Individually and as Executrix of the Last Will and Testament of Edna Baker Rice, deceased, Belle Rizzuto, Clyde H. Hurley, E. J. Hurley, Emil Hurley and Hazel Thorpe, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 7782.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Sept. 6, 1966.

E. P. Ripley, Zinn & Donnell, Santa Fe, for appellant.

Hart & Brockman, Tucumcari, for appel-lees.


COMPTON, Justice..

A basic jurisdictional question, not raised by the parties, is presented by the record on appeal. At the conclusion of the hearing on the merits, the trial court entered its decision which .included .its findings of fact and conclusions of law. No final judgment was .entered therein, carrying into effect the decision of the court; however, the appeal is taken from the decision of the court. >Clearly;.the trial court retains exclusive jurisdiction of the case until the entry of a proper judgment or 'order.- : - ü :■ . ■

Appeals will lie.oirly, from, a formal .written or judgment signed, by the judge and filed in the case, or entered upon the record of the court and -.signed by the j.udge. . Section 21-2-l(5¡), -(1), N.M. S.A:1953 Comp., Rule 5(1) qf the Supreme Court, Rules; State v. Morris, 69 N.M. 89, 364 P.2d 348; D. M. Miller Co. v. Slease, 30 N.M. 469, 238 P. 828. Compare State *688ex rel. Reynolds v. McLean, 74 N.M. 178, 392 P.2d 12.

There being no final judgment entered, the appeal is premature and must be dismissed.

It is so ordered.

CHAVEZ and NOBLE, JJ., concur.