
    NATHAN COLE v. J. N. BRYANT.
    (Filed 25 May, 1938.)
    1. Trial § 4: Appeal and Error § 37b—
    A motion for continuance is addressed to tbe sound discretion of tbe trial court, and tbe denial of tbe motion is not reviewable in tbe absence of abuse of discretion,
    2. Trial § 11: Appeal and Error § 24—
    When there is no exception to the court’s finding- tbat tbe parties consented to a consolidation of tbe actions for trial, an exception to tbe order of tbe court consolidating the actions will not be sustained.
    Appeal by defendant from Spears, J., at October Term, 1937, of New HaNover. No error.
    
      B. G. Grady for plaintiff, appellee.
    
    
      Wm. F. Jones for defendant, appellant.
    
   Per Curiam.

Three separate actions by tbe plaintiff to recover of tbe defendant attorneys’ fees for services rendered in three separate cases were consolidated for tbe purpose of trial. Tbe principal assignments of error urged on appeal are, first, to tbe refusal of tbe court to allow a motion for a continuance of tbe cases, and, second, to tbe order of tbe court consolidating tbe actions for trial.

Tbe first assignment of error cannot be sustained, since tbe continuance of a case rests in tbe sound discretion of tbe trial court and is not reviewable, in tbe absence of an abuse of discretion. Mclntosb, N. C. Practice & Procedure, par. 502, pp. 529-30. We find no abuse of discretion in tbe refusal to allow a continuance in tbe instant cases.

Tbe second assignment of error cannot be sustained for tbe reason tbat tbe court finds as a fact in tbe judgment tbat tbe cases were consolidated by consent, tbe language being as follows : “Tbe above entitled causes, coming on for bearing before bis Honor, and a jury, by consent of tbe plaintiff and defendant, tbe three separate independent suits by tbe plaintiff against tbe defendant baying been consolidated and tried as one case.” There is no exception to tbis finding.

We bave examined tbe other exceptive assignments of error discussed in tbe appellant’s brief and find no prejudicial errors.

No error.  