Bryce & Lyman v. Jones
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Bastrop. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Richardson. The only point noticed in this case is the action of the -court below upon the application by appellants, who were plaintiffs below, for a continuance.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Bastrop. Tried below before the Hon. J. P. Richardson. The only point noticed in this case is the action of the -court below upon the application by appellants, who were plaintiffs below, for a continuance. On April 5, 1871, plaintiffs presented their application for continuance, as follows: “How come plaintiffs and say, that they cannot go safely to trial of this cause for the want of the testimony of A. P. Swisher, a witness for plaintiffs, who resides in the said county of Bastrop and State of Texas. Plaintiffs would further represent that the- testimony of said Swisher is…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
In the case of Hyde v. The State, 16 Texas 453, Mr. Justice Wheeler elaborately reviewed the *208authorities, and laid down the rule that counter-affidavits are admissible to disprove due diligence.
We have long felt the necessity of the application of this rule in second and subsequent applications under our statute. If the affidavit for continuance remains uncontradicted, it forces the court to a continuance of the cause in many cases where the suspicion of bad faith and want of diligence is irresistible.
After the postponement of the cause in this case from 12 o’clock until the sitting of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hyde v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1856
3Cited by1 opinion
- Texas Transportation Co. v. Hyatt & HenningTexas Supreme Court · 1881