(a) Effect. In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon, and judgment shall be entered pursuant to Rule 58; and in granting or refusing interlocutory injunctions the court shall similarly set forth the findings of fact and conclusions of law which constitute the grounds of its action. Requests for findings are not necessary for purposes of review. The findings of a master, to the extent that the court adopts them, shall be considered as the findings of the court. If an opinion or memorandum of decision is filed, it will be sufficient if the findings of fact and conclusions of law appear therein. Findings of fact and conclusions of law are unnecessary on decisions of motions under Rules 12 or 56 or any other motion except as provided in Rule 41(b).
(b) Amendment. Upon motion of a party made not later than 10 days after receipt of written notice of entry of judgment the court may amend its findings or make additional findings and may amend the judgment accordingly, and the motion may be made with a timely motion for a new trial. When findings of fact are made in actions tried by the court without a jury, the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings may thereafter be raised whether or not the party raising the question has made in the trial court an objection to such findings or has made a motion to amend them or a motion for judgment.
(c) Time for Appeal; End of Term. The time for appeal for all parties shall be stayed by a timely motion to amend the judgment and shall run from the receipt of written notice of entry of the order granting or denying such motion. The time with which to make the motion under this Rule shall not be affected by the ending of the term of court or departure of the judge from the circuit, and the trial judge shall retain jurisdiction of the action for the purpose of hearing and disposing of such motion if not heard and disposed of during the term. Except by consent of the parties, argument on the motion shall be heard in the circuit where the trial was held. The motion may in the discretion of the court be determined on briefs filed by the parties without oral argument.
(d) Judge to be Provided with Copy. A party filing a written motion under this rule shall provide a copy of the motion to the judge within ten (10) days after the filing of the motion.
Rules 52(a) and (b) are the language of the Federal Rule. They incorporate the provisions of Code §§ 15-36-110, 15-35-130, and 15-35-140 on judgments and decrees in nonjury trials. Rule 52(c) is added to meet the needs of State practice. Rule 52(b), Motion to amend, as indicated by the words "In such actions," does not apply to cases tried by jury, but expands the right presently available in equity cases to all actions tried by the court without a jury. It is not to be confused with the right to correct clerical errors and omissions under Rule 60(a), or to open up judgments under Rule 60(b). The last sentence of Rule 52(b) makes clear that a motion to amend is optional, not a prerequisite to the right to appeal.
The third sentence in the original Rule 52(a) could be construed to alter the scope of review of appellate courts when the "two judge" rule is inapplicable and, therefore, is deleted. The amendments to Rule 52(b) and (c) provide that the time for appeal commences upon the receipt of written notice of entry of the order disposing of such motions, rather than the date when the court signed the order. Similar amendments are made in Rules 50(e) and 59.
This amendment adds Rule 52(d). It is intended to help ensure that the judge is promptly notified that the motion has been filed.
A. Introduction
Findings of fact produce more careful rulings by the trial judge. They are useful, if not essential, in appellate review and in the application of claim and issue preclusion. Rule 52(a) imposes on the judge the obligation to specifically find facts and conclusions of law in a non-jury action. The judge has a similar obligation to support the grant or denial of an interlocutory injunction so that there is an adequate record on appeal.2 The findings of law can appear in the court's opinion, or the findings of a master may be adopted as the court's findings.
The rule does not specify the nature, form, or extent of the required findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Supreme Court requires that the trial court adequately state the basis for its decision.
[T]he findings must be sufficient to allow this Court, sitting in its appellate capacity, to ensure the law is faithfully executed below. The absence of factual findings makes our task of reviewing the court order impossible because "the reasons under lying the decision [are] left to speculation." (citation omitted). To leave the chore of sorting through the record to review contradictory testimony taxes the judicial system and is unfair to the litigants as well as the lower court to whose factual determinations we give deference. (citation omitted).3
At the same time, this does not require a lower court to set out findings on all the factual questions arising in a particular case.4 The court also held that the rule is a direction to the court and that its violation does not invalidate the judgment. "[W]here a trial court substantially complies with Rule 52(a) and adequately states the basis for the result it reaches, the appellate court should not vacate the trial court's judgment for lack of an explicit or specific factual finding."5
The rule requires findings when the case is dismissed under Rule 41(b) but specifically exempts the court from making findings when deciding motions, including motions under Rule 12(b)(6) and for summary judgment.6 Nevertheless, findings may be necessary for appellate review of dispositive motions. In one case, the Court of Appeals held that the order should include the facts the trial court found determinative and undisputed and provide notice of the rationale for ruling on the motion.7 The Court stated the reason is that the appellate court needs the findings to determine whether the trial court's decision is supported by the record.8 However, the Supreme Court overruled the Court of Appeals' decision insofar as the decision is relied upon to vacate and remand orders granting summary judgment.9 The Supreme Court stated: "We agree it is better practice - and in most cases common practice - as well as beneficial to the judicial process for a trial judge to articulate relevant findings and conclusions of law in an order granting summary judgment. However, Rule 52 provides that 'findings of facts and conclusions of law are unnecessary on decisions of motions under Rules 12 or 56...' Thus, such findings and conclusions are not required for appellate review...."10
The Court of Appeals has reversed and remanded trial court rulings on motions for summary judgment when a summary judgment order failed to adequately articulate the basis for the decision.11 The Court of Appeals has emphasized the need for findings in some categories of cases including post-conviction reviews and confinement under the sexual predator statute.12
At the same time, the appellate courts have affirmed form orders when the basis of the ruling can be determined from the record.13 The procedural posture may explain these cases. Decisions denying motions under Rule 12(b)(6) or motions for summary judgment which allow the case to continue are not immediately appealable and do not require detailed orders. Likewise, many trial management issues that are within the discretion of the trial court do not require detailed explanations because of the context in which they are made. Dispositive motions at the end of the case when the facts and law are more clearly articulated, or where there is conflicting testimony, do require detailed findings to ensure that the appellate court can adequately review the issue.
The judge prepares the findings of facts and conclusions of law. Counsel may submit proposed orders which are served on all counsel at the same...
