Robinson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R'y Co.

| Iowa | Dec 16, 1887

Adams, Oh. J.

We do not think that the issue was so changed as to call for evidence different from that apparently called for under the original issue. It appears to us, therefore, that the continuance was unnecessary. The defendant then might have protected itself by waiving the order for a continuance, after seeing that it was accompanied by the order for the payment of costs. After accepting the unnecessary order for a continuance, accompanied by the order for the payment of costs, we do not think that it should be heard to complain of the latter order. Affirmed.

Reed, J., dissenting.