ADL v. Lane

“To properly exercise discretion, a court must inquire into the nature of and reasons for a party’s continuance request and evaluate its merits." State v. Keerins, 145 Or App 491, 494, 932 P2d 65 (1996).

Respondent appealed a judgment of dissolution and a supplemental judgment awarding attorney fees. Respondent assigned error to the trial court’s abuse of discretion because it denied his motion to postpone the trial. Respondent requested a 30-day trial postponement after his attorney withdrew from the case. The trial court denied the motion for postponement. Respondent argued that he did not have the cognitive function to handle the trial without an attorney because of his documented disability. Petitioner opposed the postponement because of the efforts it took her to subpoena her witnesses and argued that Respondent had enough time to find a new attorney. “To properly exercise discretion, a court must inquire into the nature of and reasons for a party’s continuance request and evaluate its merits.” State v. Keerins, 145 Or App 491, 494, 932 P2d 65 (1996). The Court found that the trial court did abuse its discretion. The trial court failed to consider Respondent’s disability and the fact that he acted quickly to find a new attorney after his current one withdrew. He requested the postponement in a timely manner and at the time of his request he provided the name and contact number of an attorney that would help him if he got the postponement. Reversed and remanded.