Hill v. Capital Transit Co.

D.C. Circuit

Hill v. Capital Transit Co.

135 F.2d 948, 77 U.S. App. D.C. 391, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3463

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMay 17, 1943

DocketNo. 8057

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 135 F.2d 948 (Hill v. Capital Transit Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hill v. Capital Transit Co., 135 F.2d 948, 77 U.S. App. D.C. 391, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3463 (D.C. Cir. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The attorney for the appellant filed a motion for continuance in the court below on the ground that his health required rest and relief from trial work for several months. The motion was denied and subsequently the case dismissed for want of prosecution. The record shows that the trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying the motion for continuance and the judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The attorney for the appellant filed a motion for continuance in the court below on the ground that his health required rest and relief from trial work for several months. The motion was denied and subsequently the case dismissed for want of prosecution. The record shows that the trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying the motion for continuance and the judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 F.2d 948, 77 U.S. App. D.C. 391, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3463, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-capital-transit-co-cadc-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack