Court Opinion

ID: 9829346
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:14:19.665657+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:00.229621
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
If appellee is correct in his position that in praying for the injunction he did not rely on his first motion for new trial filed in the justice court, and that appellant advanced no assignment attacking the sufficiency of that motion as a basis for the relief granted, yet we do not see how his proposition can avail him. His second motion for a new trial, denominated by him “Motion by defendant to set aside judgment by default,” was defective, in that it failed to state either a meritorious ground of defense or a reason for his failure to present such defense at the proper time. What we have said in regard to the first motion applies with equal force to the second motion.. So, if appellee relies on the second motion alone as a basis for an equitable relief, it must be denied him, because no error is shown in the refusal of the court to file it, and because, had it been filed, it is wholly insufficient as a ground for such relief.
The motion for rehearing is in all things overruled.