C.R.C.P. 40

History

Cross references: For precedence of motions for preliminary injunctions, see C.R.C.P. 65(a). ANNOTATION Law reviews. For article, ‘‘Trials: Rules 38- 53’’, see 23 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 571 (1951). Annotator’s note. Since this rule is similar to § 193 of the former Code of Civil Procedure, which was supplanted by the Rules of Civil Procedure in 1941, relevant cases construing that section have been included in the annota- tions to this rule. In the interests of justice, trials must be expedited. Benster v. Bell, 83 Colo. 587, 267 P. 792 (1928); Scofield v. Scofield, 89 Colo. 409, 3 P.2d 794 (1931). The right to a jury trial may not be uti- lized to disrupt a trial calendar and to obtain delay. Murray v. District Court, 189 Colo. 217, 539 P.2d 1254 (1975). If it may be said that the setting of the cause for trial by the court of its own motion without notice is erroneous, a party must show where he was prejudiced by such action. Lux v. McLeod, 19 Colo. 465, 36 P. 246 (1894). Where counsel is present at the time a cause is set for trial and makes no objection to the setting of the case, all irregularities in the notice of such setting and the service thereof are waived. Cerussite Mining Co. v. Anderson, 19 Colo. App. 307, 75 P. 158 (1903). The fact that an attorney has other cases set for trial in another court at the same time does not excuse him or his client from being in attendance at the trial of a case regularly reached on the calendar of the court where no motion for a continuance or showing is made why the case should not proceed to trial; under such circumstances there is no abuse of discre- tion in the refusal of the trial court to set aside a judgment regularly entered. Diebold v. Diebold, 79 Colo. 7, 243 P. 630 (1926). Applied in Continental Title Co. v. District Court, 645 P.2d 1310 (Colo. 1982).