continuance rarely is reversible error in Missouri

2001In Interest of S-G., 779 S.W.2d 45, 51 (Mo.App.1989).

2001In Interest of S_____G., 779 S.W.2d 45, 51 (Mo.App.1989).

1989Missouri Public Service Co. v. Argenbright, 457 S.W.2d 777, 785 [10] (Mo.1970).

1978“We recognize that the denial of a continuance rarely is reversible error; yet, the trial court enjoys neither an absolute nor an arbitrary discretion, and the court’s action will be reversed if there has been an abuse of discretion.” Missouri Public Service Company v. Argenbright, 457 S.W.2d 777, 785 [10] (Mo.1970). 2 In support of his application for a continuance, based on his own absence as being that of a material witness, it was necessary for plaintiff to show, among other things, “due diligence upon the part of the applicant to obtain such witness or testimony.” Rule 65.04(1), V.A.M.R.

2012Point I — Denial of Father’s Motion for Continuance “The denial of a request for a continuance rarely is reversible error; yet the trial court enjoys neither an absolute nor an arbitrary discretion, and the trial court’s action will be reversed if there has been an abuse of discretion.” In re D.C., 49 S.W.3d 694, 698-99 (Mo.App.

2004And at that time the court noted that neither parent would be granted any further continuances.” “The denial of a request for a continuance rarely is reversible error; yet the trial court enjoys neither an absolute nor an arbitrary discretion, and the trial court’s action will be reversed if there has been an abuse of discretion.” D.C., 49 S.W.3d at 698-99 .