Sup.R. 41(B)(1) provides, in pertinent part: "The court should not consider any motion for a continuance due to a conflict of trial assignment dates unless a copy of the conflicting assignment is attached to the motion and the motion is filed not less than thirty days prior to trial." In Wheaton Industries, Inc. v. Fashion Two Twenty, Inc. (1993), 11th Dist. No. 90-P-2185, 1993 Ohio App, the Court reviewed the exception to this general rule: "The duty to move for a continuance of a case set for trial on the same date as an attorney has another trial already scheduled is not abrogated by the possibility that the earlier set case will be settled or otherwise disposed of prior to trial. If the attorney chooses to delay a motion for continuance because of an expectation that the scheduling conflict will be resolved, it is done at the risk that no continuance will be granted in the later-set case. A trial court may exercise its discretion in deciding whether a motion for a continuance was timely made, and if it holds that the motion was not timely, it may proceed to adjudication of the case ex parte." 1993 Ohio App.