Bushnell v. Crooke Mining & Smelting Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Bushnell v. Crooke Mining & Smelting Co., 150 U.S. 82 (1893)
14 S. Ct. 22; 37 L. Ed. 1007; 1893 U.S. LEXIS 2354
The Chief Justice:
Bushnell v. Crooke Mining & Smelting Co.
Opinion
Wq. should not have been called on to reiterate the rule that án application for a rehearing cannot be entertained when presented after the expiration of the term at which the judgment was- rendered. Hudson v. Guestier, 7 Cranch, 1; Browder v. M'Arthur, 7 Wheat. 58; Sibbald v. United States, 12 Pet. 488 ; Brooks v. Railroad Company, 102 U. S.107 ; Williams v. Conger, 131 U. S. 390.
Application denied.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Bushnell v. Crooke Mining and Smelting Company
- Cited By
- 7 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- An application for a rehearing cannot be entertained when presented aft^r tlie expiration of the term at which the judgment was rendered.