Case ID: cal-unrep_1/html/0058-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "TERRY, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

VICTOR MOLLE, Respondent, v. JACOB KOHLBERG & CO., Appellants.
    No. 1415;
    March 3, 1857.
    Continuance — Diligence. — An Application for a Continuance should be denied on a showing that the applicant has been lacking in diligence.
    APPEAL from Fifth Judicial District, Calavaras County.
    Mount & Buchanan for respondent'; W. L. Dudley, R. Beatty & Botts for appellants.
   TERRY, J.

— The only error assigned is the refusal of the court to continue the cause on application of defendants.

"We think the continuance was properly refused. The answer was filed on the 6th of June, 1856, and no effort was made to procure the testimony until the 2d of October, when a subpoena was issued for a nonresident witness. This was not such diligence as would authorize a postponement of the cause.

Judgment affirmed.

I concur: Burnett, J.