CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


WILLIAMS V. CONGER, 131 U. S. 390 (1888)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 131 U. S. 390 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Williams v. Conger, 131 U.S. 390 (1888)

Williams v. Conger

No. 105 of October Term, 1887

Decided October 22, 1888

131 U.S. 390

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Syllabus

A renewal of an application for a rehearing after the close of the term at which judgment was rendered, and for reasons which have been passed upon by the Court, is not in order, and does not commend itself to the favorable consideration of the Court.

This was a petition to correct a clerical mistake in the opinion of this Court delivered April 2, 1888, Williams v. Conger, 125 U. S. 397, citing in support of the power to make the amendment Bank of Kentucky v. Wistar, 3 Pet. 431. To this petition was appended a petition for a rehearing which had been presented and overruled at October Term, 1887, accompanied by a "demand upon the Court" to give it a hearing. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 131 U. S. 391

MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY delivered the opinion of the Court.

Leave to file a motion for rehearing in this case is asked for on the ground of clerical error in the opinion. A motion for rehearing was made at the last term upon precisely the same brief now sought to be filed, and, notwithstanding the alleged misconception in the opinion of the point made by the plaintiff in error, the Court was satisfied with the conclusion it had reached, and that no modification of the judgment was required, and no rehearing was necessary, or called for. The motion was therefore denied. The persistent renewal of the application at this time, after the close of the term at which judgment was rendered, and especially upon the same reasons, once overruled, is not in order, and does not recommend itself to the favorable consideration of the Court.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED