Carroll & Downs v. Groover
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Attachment; from city court of Hinesville — Judge W. C. Hodges. February 12, 1921.
1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.
1. A motion was made to continue this case because of the absence of leading counsel, who was “in attendance upon the Hnited States court for the southern district of Georgia, ” and who was “ engaged in the trial of cases in the said district court. ” In Cotton States Life Ins. Co. v. Edwards. *74874 Ga. 221 (1), it was held: “The continuance of cases on account of the absence of counsel is not favored, and such absence is no cause of postponement, unless in cases of necessity or misconception. Absence without leave, to attend trials of cases pending in other courts, is no ground for continuance.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sealy v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1846
- Hilton v. HaynesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1918
- Howard Supply Co. v. BunnSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- James v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1920
- Kennedy v. DukesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Austin v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1925
- Tennessee-Virginia Construction Co. v. WillinghamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
- Harmon v. WigginsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
- Hamrick v. StewartCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1922
- Merchants & Manufacturers Transfer Co. v. Auto Rental & Leasing, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.