Prudential Ins. Co. v. De Bord

• Decision Date: 12 March 1897
• Citation: 17 Ind.App. 224,46 N.E. 553
• Parties: PRUDENTIAL INS. CO. v. DE BORD.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

17 Ind.App. 224

46 N.E. 553

PRUDENTIAL INS. CO.

v.DE BORD.

Appellate Court of Indiana.

March 12, 1897.

Appeal from circuit court, Vigo county; D. N. Taylor, Judge.

Action by Reuben De Bord against the Prudential Insurance Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.M. C. Hamil, for appellant. Peter M. Faley and J. Forner, for appellee.

HENLEY, J.

The only error assigned by appellant herein is the alleged error of the lower court in overruling appellant's motion for a new trial. The motion for a new trial is based solely upon the fact, as contended by appellant, that the court misled appellant and appellant's counsel as to when this cause would be tried. In support of the motion, and as a part of the same, were filed the affidavits of counsel for appellant and the affidavit of appellant's agent, William T. Jones, stating therein the following facts and circumstances, viz.: That on the ------ day of January, 1896, the cause was set for trial in the Vigo circuit court, at which time said Jones appeared, representing the defendant, and, together with his attorneys, was present and ready for trial. That at said time another cause was on trial, and being heard by the court, and the court informed affiant that this cause would be tried the next day. That affiant was present with his counsel on the next day, but, on account of the same cause as before stated, the court said that this cause would be continued until the following day. That on the following or the next day thereafter appellant and counsel, finding the court yet engaged in the trial of other causes, went to the court, and informed the court that affiant had business for the following day, and that appellant's counsel, Mr. Beecher, told the court that he had a cause set for trial at Sullivan on the ----- day of January, and that he had arranged to leave on the following afternoon to consult about the case, and it was impossible for him to get ready for the trial, and that the court then said to affiant that he would continue and pass the case indefinitely. That, relying on the statement of the court, affiant instructed the witnesses to go, and he would notify them when they were wanted. That said conversation occurred about 9 o'clock a. m., and that about the hour of 3 o'clock p. m. affiant received notice to appear before the judge at the courthouse. That the judge then informed affiant that this cause would be tried. Affiant then, through appellant's counsel, who were present, informed the court that, relying on the statements of the court made in the morning, important business...