
    Wm. Boyle, Respondent, v. Powers Clarke et al., Appellants.
    Kansas City Court of Appeals,
    November 5, 1894.
    1. Appeals: cost. A judgment for eost will not support an appeal.
    2. -: final judgment. The ease should be finally disposed of before an appeal is taken.
    
      Appeal from the Buchanan Circuit Court.—Hon. Henry M. Ramey, Judge.
    Appeal dismissed.-
    
      Sterling P. Reynolds for appellants.
    (1) The court erred in continuing the cause at the cost of defendants. R. S. 1889, sec. 2128; Colhoun v. Crawford, 50 Mo. 458; Keltenbaugh v. Railroad, 34 Mo. App. 147. (2) The court erred in overruling defendants’ motion to retax costs. Pierson v. Railroad, 18 Mo. App. 439; Shed v. Railroad, 67 Mo. 687; Authorities, supra.
    
    
      Sherwood <& Allen for respondent.
    (1) Every presumption will be indulged in favor of the correctness of the action of the trial court in granting and refusing continuances. State v. Gamble, 108 Mo. 500; Blair v. Railroad, 89 Mo. 383; State v. Wilson, 85 Mo. 134.
   Ellison, J.

In this case there is only a judgment for costs rendered on the continuance of the cause by the trial court. A motion to retax was filed by defendant and overruled, whereupon he appealed to this court. There is not to be found in the record any final judgment in the cause and we are riot advised whether the case has ever been disposed of. It is settled by a long line of decisions in this state that a judgment for costs will not support an appeal. Conn v. Ferree, 60 Mo. 17; Boggess v. Cox, 48 Mo. 278; Evans v. Russel, 61 Mo. 37.

Many others might be cited to the same effect. The case should have been finally disposed of, otherwise we may have many appeals on as many different parts of the same case.

The appeal will be dismissed.

All concur.  