Pierson v. Holbrook
Before: Heydeneeldt
Synopsis
Appeal from the Fourth Judicial District.
The defendant in this action appealed from an order of the said District Court, overruling an application for a continuance, made by said defendant, upon affidavit and motion filed, &c.
Heydeneeldt, Justice, delivered the opinion of the Court, Murray, Justice, concurring.
Appeal from the refusal of a continuance.
The defendant’s answer was filed May 10th, 1852, and the application for a continuance, to take the testimony of a witness in New York, was filed June 14th, 1852, during which time no attempt was made to sue out a commission for the purpose.
This is not sufficient diligence to entitle a party to the indulgence applied for. One half of the time which would be required to take the testimony, was allowed to elapse without [599]action. When the distance and delay are so great, every consideration requires that parties should be held to the strictest diligence.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)