Davis v. Martin Marietta Materials, Inc., 2010 OK 78

March 16, 2010 judgment granted employers' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
Davis filed a ten-day extension request on March 30, 2010 (tenth working day after judgment).
Extension granted; order denying motion to reconsider entered June 18, 2010.
Davis filed an appeal within 30 days of the order's entry date.
Employers moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely; issue is whether extension can toll the appeal deadline.
Court reiterates that timely petition in error is jurisdictional and that post-judgment motions do not extend the appeal period absent strict compliance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is the appeal timely filed under § 990A?	Davis argues timely filing occurred within 30 days.	Employers contend the appeal was untimely.	Appeal dismissed for untimely filing.
Do post-judgment extensions or motions to reconsider extend the jurisdictional appeal deadline?	Extensions should toll the appeal period when timely granted.	Extensions and reconsideration motions do not alter the 30-day jurisdictional limit.	No extension permitted; appeals must be filed within 30 days.

Gilbert v. Security Finance Corp. of Oklahoma, Inc., 2006 OK 58 (OK 2006) (timeliness of appeal is jurisdictional)
Whitehead v. Tulsa Public Schools, 1998 OK 71 (OK 1998) (timeliness governs reviewability)
Stites v. DUIT Constr. Co., 1995 OK 69 (OK 1995) (ten-day limits for post-judgment motions)
Woods v. Woods, 1992 OK 64 (OK 1992) (precedent on time limitations)
Rogers v. Quiktrip Corp., 2010 OK 3 (OK 2010) (specific statute governs over general provision)
Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. Oklahoma County, 1980 OK 97 (OK 1980) (specific governs over general provisions)
Independent Sch. Dist. No. 1 v. Board of Cty. Comm'rs, 1983 OK 123 (OK 1983) (specific vs. general governing rules)