Wright v. Clark
Wright v. Clark
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
This suit was commenced before a justice of the peace and taken by appeal to the district court, where the judgment of the justice was affirmed. We learn from the bill of exceptions, that the appellants moved the court for a continuance and assigned for cause, the absence of papoers, which it appears had been previously taken from the court by their attorney, and had not been returned. The neglect of their own attorney, a delinquency which they had been instrumental in producing, cannot be considered good ground for a continuance. We therefore think that their application was correctly overruled.
Objections are urged to the judgment of affirmance. It
Many cases are taken to the district court for the purpose of delay, without even the expectation of disturbing the judgment of the justice, and in such cases it would be a useless expense to parties, a futile detention in the administration of jnstice, for courts to award atrial denovo. Hence, where default is made by the appellant, it would be fallacious to adopt that practice, even if the statute admitted of doubt in its construction. But we think the statute leaves no room for doubt, and that it expressly authorizes the course pursued by the court below, in this case.
'Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.