Hunter v. Waite
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Fayette. The application for a continuance was made at the return Term.
1Opinion of the CourtLipscomb, J.
The first assignment of error, in this case, is, that the District Court erred in refusing the continuance asked by the appellant. On inspecting the transcript of the affidavit in support of the motion for continuance, it will be found to be vague and uncertain, and not entitling the party *86to the continuance prayed. It alleges “ that affiant cannot go “ safely to trial, for want of testimony material to his defence; “ that the witnesses, whose testimony he desires, reside beyond “ the limits of the State, and that he has not had time to procure “ their testimony since the commencement of the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Stachely v. PeirceTexas Supreme Court · 1866
- Matlock v. GloverTexas Supreme Court · 1885
- Mensing Brothers & Co. v. CardwellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903
- Franks v. WilliamsTexas Supreme Court · 1873
- Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. HamerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.