Peck v. Moody

Texas Supreme Court
Peck v. Moody, 33 Tex. 84 (Tex. 1870)
Morrill

Peck v. Moody

Opinion of the Court

Morrill, C. J.

As a general rule this court will hot revise the discretionary acts of a district judge. But when the statutes provide for interlocutory judgments, and the terms upon which the same shall be granted or refused, such judgments become not a .question of discretion to be exercised or not, as a judge may choose; hut a matter of right.

In a large, majority of. the cases in which a continuance is granted or refused, a judge is bound to exercise a sound judgment and discretion; but there are cases, when to refuse a continuance, would be a denial of statutory rights.

*86We consider the ease before us as one of this last named class. In consequence of being forced into a trial, the plaintiff was compelled to take a non-suit, and the court erred in not setting aside the non-suit, and reinstating the cause on the docket.

Reversed and remanded.

Reference

Full Case Name
Barton Peck v. J. A. Moody and others
Status
Published
Syllabus
1. Where statutes provide for interlocutory judgments, and for the terms ob which such judgments shall be granted, such judgments become a matter of right, and are not mere questions of discretion in the court below. 2. Though the granting or refusal of a continuance is ordinarily a matter of discretion o:.Jy, yet there are cases in which a refusal of a continuance-would be a denial of statutory rights. See this ease ior an example. • 3. When a plaintiff was forced to take a non-suit by the refusal of a continuance to which he was entitled as a matter of right, it was error for the court to overrule his motion to sot aside the non-suit and reinstate the cause.