
    No. 25,882.
    Clara B. Gardner et al., Appellees, v. Charles Deal et al., Appellants.
    
    SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
    
      Continuance — Sickness of Party — Conflicting Evidence. It is held that no error is shown in the refusal to grant a continuance on account of the sickness of one of the parties, where the evidence on that'point was conflicting.
    Appeal from Cowley district court; Oliver P. Fuller, judge.
    Opinion filed April 11, 1925.
    Affirmed.
    
      J. E. Torrance, and O. W. Tonance, both of Winfield, for the appellants.
    
      C. T. Atkinson, and Tom Pringle, both of Arkansas City, for the appellees.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Mason, J.:

This action was brought upon a money judgment rendered in another state. The only defense interposed was a cross demand for money had and received. No evidence in behalf of the defendants was offered at the trial, but they asked a continuance on the ground that one of them was sick and the other (her husband) was required to be in attendance upon her. Complaint is made of the overruling of that motion and a motion for a new trial, and a motion to set aside the ruling on the latter motion. These matters were determined upon conflicting evidence, part of which was oral, and we see no ground for interfering with the decision of the trial court.

The judgment is affirmed.  