Rothleutner v. Bateman

Sep 17, 1915
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Beck
Beck, J.

1. All applications for continuances are addressed to the sound discretion ‍​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‍of the court. And it not appearing that the discretion of the trial court in refusing a continuance in the instant case was ‍​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‍abused, the exception to the denial of a new trial because of such refusal is without merit.

2. As is recognized by the plaintiff in ‍​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‍error and shown by the bill of ex*104ceptions, tlie adverse ruling upon the motion for a continuance is controlling; and that ruling having ‍​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‍been sustained, the judgment of the court below is

September 17, 1915. Action for damages. Before Judge Ellis.. Fulton superior court. June 26, 1914. Anderson & Anderson and P. B. ‍​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‍D’Orr, for plaintiff. George Westmoreland, for defendant.

Affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.