¶1Bill of-Review — Petition for Leave to Pile — Practice in Circuit Court of Appeals.
¶2On a petition to the circuit court of appeals, after a decision of that court affirming a judgment of the circuit court, for leave to file in the lower court a hill in the nature of a bill of review, it is deemed, the better practice to grant such leave as a matter of course, unless there are special reasons to the contrary, without considering the merits of the proposed bill.
¶3On Petition for Leave to File a Bill in the Nature of a Bill of Review'.
¶4Win. E. Church and Geo. A. ganders, for petitioner.
¶5J. M. Hamill and J. R. Williams, opposed.
¶6Before WOODS, JENKINS, and SHOWALTER, Circuit Judges.
¶8This is a petition to this court for leave to file
¶9in the circuit court of the United States for the Southern district of Illinois a bill, in the nature of a bill of review, to obtain a new trial or reconsideration of the case of the petitioner against the county of White, in the state of Illinois, wherein the judgment rendered in favor of defendant was affirmed by this court, as shown by our opinion in Seymour v. White Co., 34 U. S. App. 658, 20 C. C. A. 402, and 74 Fed. 207. For the necessity of obtaining such leave reference is made to Bank v. Taylor, 9 U. S. App. 406, 4 C. C. A. 55, and 53 Fed. 854, in which Southard v. Russell, 16 How. 547, 570, and Kingsbury v. Buckner, 134 U. S. 650, 571, 10 Sup. Ct. 638, and other cases, are cited. A copy of the bill which it is proposed to file accompanies the petition, hut, without consideration of its merits, it is deemed the belter practice, unless for special reason to the contrary, to grant the petition as of course. To the extent, therefore, that the leave of tiiis court is necessary and may be granted, it is ordered that the petitioner have leave to file in the court below the bill proffered, or such other or amended bill or petition as he may be advised, and that the costs of this proceeding be taxed against the petitioner.