Appeals — Order refusing new trial — Absence during trial — Instructions of counsel.
In a suit in ejectment in which it appeared that the case was tried and a verdict entered for the plaintiff in the absence of defendant and her counsel, and defendant thereafter moved for a new trial on the ground that in reliance upon the instructions of her counsel defendant had arranged to attend court on the day after the day the trial was actually held and the court below found that such was not the fact, it was Held that judgment for the plaintiff should be affirmed.
Argued January 8, 1946.
PER CURIAM, March 25, 1946:
The order of the Court below is affirmed on the opinion of Judge HARVEY.