Hannan v. St. Clair

• Decision Date: 06 July 1908
• Citation: 44 Colo. 134,96 P. 822
• Parties: HANNAN v. ST. CLAIR.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

96 P. 822

44 Colo. 134

HANNAN v. ST. CLAIR.

Supreme Court of Colorado

July 6, 1908

Appeal from County Court, City and County of Denver; Albert S Frost, Judge.

Action by George E. Hannan against Edward A. St. Clair for injuries to a horse and buggy caused by defendant's automobile. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Gobin Stair, for appellant.

W. W Dale, for appellee.

STEELE C.J.

The suit was begun before a justice of the peace, and from a judgment in the sum of $186 the defendant appealed to the county court. After the service of notice upon the defendant the cause was set for trial in the county court. On the day fixed for the trial, the defendant not appearing, the plaintiff was permitted to offer proof in support of his claim, and the court rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $186 and costs. The judgment was rendered on June 29, 1904. On July 6th following, the defendant filed his motion, supported by affidavit, to set aside the judgment. Counter affidavits were filed by the plaintiff. The court, upon the hearing, denied the motion to set aside the judgment, and thereupon the defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals. He assigns as error the refusal of the court to set aside the finding and judgment in favor of the plaintiff because it is against the evidence and because the damages are excessive.

This court will not review the action of the trial court in refusing to set aside a judgment, unless it should appear that the court in so ruling abused its discretion. The defendant admits, in his affidavit in support of his motion to set aside the judgment and for a new trial, that he received notice that the motion would be made to have the cause set for hearing, and that he paid no attention to the motion until after the judgment was taken, but relied upon his knowledge of the length of time that elapsed between the notice and the trial in other cases, and made no effort to employ counsel until after judgment was rendered. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that the court abused its discretion in declining to set aside the judgment.

The plaintiff claimed damages for an injury to his horse and buggy occasioned, as he states, through the negligence of the driver of the defendant's automobile. The plaintiff testified, speaking of the driver of the automobile: 'He came around the corner and turned around and talked with the people...