Cohn v. Brownstone
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior court of Tulare County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Vanclief, C.
Action for work and labor, in which defendant denies his indebtedness to plaintiff without denying the services alleged, and pleads a counterclaim.
Judgment for plaintiff in the sum of nine hundred dollars, from which, and an order denying his motion for a new trial, the defendant appeals.
Did the court err in denying defendant’s motion for a postponement of the trial? is the only question presented for decision.
On the sixth day of January, 1890, the cause was set for trial on the twenty-third day of the same month, of which counsel for defendant had due notice. Accordingly, the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Buck v. McCabeOhio Supreme Court · 1942
- Hwang Jae Corp. v. Marianas Trading & Development Corp.Supreme Court of The Commonwealth of The Northern Mariana Islands · 1994