Williams v. Baker
Illinois Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. Thomas F. Tipton, Judge, presiding. This was an action of assumpsit, by Nicholas S. Baker against Henry Williams and F. Kimler, upon a promissory note. The declaration contained a special count upon the note, and also the common counts.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. Thomas F. Tipton, Judge, presiding. This was an action of assumpsit, by Nicholas S. Baker against Henry Williams and F. Kimler, upon a promissory note. The declaration contained a special count upon the note, and also the common counts. At the January term, 1872, at which the cause was tried, the defendant Williams filed his affidavit for a continuance, which, after giving the title of the case, was as follows: “ Henry Williams, one of the defendants in this cause, on oath, says that he can not safely proceed to the trial of the above…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Thornton
The motion for a continuance was properly overruled. The affidavit was defective. It only stated that the presence of the absent attorney was “necessary to a trial of the cause.” The statute requires that it shall appear to the court, by affidavit, that the attendance of the attorney “is necessary to a fair and proper trial.”
The party had an attorney in court who seems to have made every available defense. The case was exceedingly simple, and could have been defended by any tvro in the profession. We must presume that the omission to state any facts as to the character of th~ suit, to enable…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thompson v. HoaglandIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by6 opinions
- Devine v. Chicago City Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1908
- Tapley v. HermanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- Fitzgerald v. LorenzIllinois Supreme Court · 1899
- Fitzgerald v. LorenzAppellate Court of Illinois · 1899
- Mackin v. CodyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.