
    13669.
    Heath v. Shurling.
    Decided December 12, 1922.
    Complaint; from city court of Wrightsville— B. B. Blount, judge pro hac vice. April 8, 1922.
    
      G. S. Glaxton, Adams & Gamp, for plaintiH in error.
    
      B. L. Stephens, contra.
   Luke, J.

In view of the counter-showing made to the motion for a continuance in this case, this court cannot say that there was an abuse of legal discretion in overruling such motion, it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.  