Several recent decisions of the Court of Appeals seem to be pointing in the direction of requiring the filing of a Motion for New Trial in order to preserve error on appeal. It has long been the thought and practice in Mississippi that such Motions were designed more for jury trials than Chancery cases decided by a Judge and were unnecessary to preserve error on appeal. The most recent decision pointing in this direction is Robinson v. Brown, No. 2009-CA-01599-COA (Decided March 22, 2011). In that case, the Court held that the appellant was procedurally barred from contending the trial judge did not make findings of fact in determining support because no post trial motion was made. An abundance of caution seems to mandate the filing of post trial objections to rulings in order to preserve error for appeal. Unfortunately, this can extend the life and expense of the case quite a bit and is usually futile because Judges tend to not change what they have already decided. It’s hard to get hearing dates, and as one Judge put it, he “didn’t even remember the case” by the time the Motion for New Trial was heard.