Court Opinion

ID: 9832460
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:55:49.432767+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:46.997939
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
In his motion for rehearing appellant urges that this Court erred in disposing of his first five assignments of error in which he complained of the filing of a trial amendment by some of the appellees, and in holding that the statements under those assignments of error were not sufficient under the rules. While it is true that we held those statements insufficient, nevertheless, it is also true that we did consider them and overrule them as being without merit. We adhere to that holding. It is deemed sufficient to reiterate that the trial below continued for three months after the filing of the trial amendment complained of, which was sufficient to nullify any element of surprise in the new pleading. Besides another appellee’s original pleading, filed before the trial began, embraced the essentials of the matters set up in the trial amendment. In the face of all these facts it is quite clear that this Court cannot say that the trial judge abused his discretion in allowing appellee to file the trial amendment, or in refusing applications for continuances based on that ruling and proceeding with the trial during the ensuing three months. Certainly, no reversible error is shown in appellant’s first five points.
Appellant’s motion for rehearing will be overruled.