Stinnett v. Wm. M. Rice & Co.

Citations

• 36 Tex. 106

Syllabus

<p>1. Six months having elapsed from the mailing of the commission to take depositions, and no other timely effort having been made to procure the testimony, it was not error to overrule a motion for a continuance.</p> <p>2. An affidavit made by an attorney for a continuance, on account of the absence of a witness, should negative the supposition that there might be other witnesses known to his client, as well as to himself, by whom the same facts could be proved ; and it should state why the affidavit is not made by the party himself; and also that the party is not seeking to evade the requirements of law by procuring affiant to swear to a state of facts to which he himself could not swear.</p>