Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MISSOURI, KANSAS TEXAS RAILWAY COMPANY v. W. J. HOWELL.

1. Assignment of Error.

An assignment of error, that "the court erred in overruling defendant's application for a continuance," is sufficient. It complains of a specific ruling of the trial court, and we therefore think it sufficient.. 429

2. Competent Witness — Pardon.

It seems that a pardon granted at any time before the trial renders a felon convict competent as witness. So held where the plaintiff was so restored........... 429 430

GAINES, CHIEF JUSTICE.

In this case the applicant's first assignment of error in the Court of Civil Appeals was as follows: "The court erred in overruling defendant's application for a continuance." That court held, that this assignment was too general to require consideration. We can not concur in this conclusion. The assignment complains of a specific ruling of the trial court, and we therefore think it sufficient. In our opinion, it would serve no useful purpose to require greater particularity in an assignment of this character. But we also think that the ruling of the trial court, which was complained of in the assignment, was correct.

We are also of the opinion, that none of the other grounds of error alleged in the application are well taken. The writ is therefore refused.

Application refused.

Delivered January 17, 1895.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

M. K. T. RY. CO. v. HOWELL
(Jan 17, 1895)