Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

131 U.S. 390

9 S. Ct. 793

33 L. Ed. 201

Docket No. 105 of October Term, 1887. —

Williams v. Conger

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided October 22, 1888.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1888-10-22

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.

1 counsel of record

Relies on Williams v. Conger · The Bank of the Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Wistar Price · Means v. Dowd

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Petition denied / appeal dismissed · 8–0 · Decided 1888-10-22

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1956

10 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

4018881890190019101920193019401950decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1EEEOE TO THE CIRCUIT COUET OF THE UNITED STATES FOE THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS.

¶2A 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.

¶3This 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.

¶4*391Mr. Eugene Williams for both petitions.

¶5Mr. Justice Bradley

¶6delivered the opinion of the court.

¶7Leave 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.

/131/us/390 · .json · Public domain