Roemer v. Simon
Cases that cite this one
45 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Susan D. Goland and Patricia B. Skidmore v. Central Intelligence Agency (D.C. Cir. 1978)
- United States v. Newbury Mfg. Co. (1st Cir. 1941)
- Reed v. Thompson (United States District Court for the District of Alaska 1919)
- Star Pub. Co. v. Martin (Del. 1953)
- Star Publishing Co. v. Martin (Superior Court of Delaware 1953)
- Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co. (Supreme Court of the United States 1944)
- Hall v. United States (10th Cir. 1935)
- Nicolo San Filippo v. John F. Mulcahey, District Director of Immigration and Naturalization (1st Cir. 1958)
- Hilario Sierra v. Merchants Mutual Casualty Company, Intervenor (1st Cir. 1958)
- Switzer v. Marzall (District Court, District of Columbia 1951)
- Chisholm-Ryder Co. v. Buck (4th Cir. 1933)
- Delaware & Hudson Co. v. Stankus (3d Cir. 1933)
- Jensen v. New York Life Ins. Co. (8th Cir. 1932)
- Motorfrigerator Co. v. Frigidaire Sales Corp. (4th Cir. 1932)
- Jensen v. New York Life Ins. Co. (8th Cir. 1931)
- Bailey v. Crump (4th Cir. 1930)
- Brick v. A. I. Namm & Sons, Inc. (District Court, E.D. New York 1927)
- Baltimore S. S. Co. v. Phillips (2d Cir. 1925)
- Elshoff v. Murray (Ill. App. Ct. 1924)
- Ellis v. Reed (9th Cir. 1919)
- Ellis v. Reed (9th Cir. 1917)
- Sundh Electric Co. v. Cutler-Hammer Mfg. Co. (2d Cir. 1917)
- Wagner v. Meccano (6th Cir. 1916)
- Murphy v. Milford, A. & W. St. Ry. Co. (1st Cir. 1913)
- Strand v. Griffith (9th Cir. 1905)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court. i
It is clear, that, after an appeal in equity to this court, we cannot, upon motion, set aside a decree of the court below, and grant a rehearing. ' We can only affirm, reverse, or modify the ■decree appealed from, and that upon the hearing of the cause. No new evidence can be received here. Rév. Stat. sect. 698. The court below cannot grant a rehearing'after .the term at which the final decree was rendered. Equity Rule, 88. It would be useless to remand this cause, theféfore, as the term at which the decree was rendered has passed. If the term still continued, the proper practice would be to make application to the court below for a rehearing, and have that court send to us a request for a return of the record,' in order that it- : might proceed further with the cause. Should such á request' be made, we might, in a proper case and under proper restrictions, make the necessary order; but we cannot make such .an order on the application of the parties. The court below alone can make the request of us. The application of the parties must be addressed to that court, and not to us.
Motion denied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.