Bushnell v. Crooke Mining & Smelting Co.
Bushnell v. Crooke Mining & Smelting Co.
150 U.S. 82; 14 S. Ct. 22; 37 L. Ed. 1007; 1893 U.S. LEXIS 2354
(United States Reports)
Cases that cite this one
7 later published cases cite this decision.
- Wojculewicz v. State (Conn. 1955)
- Watson v. Gallagher (6th Cir. 1953)
- Nachod v. Engineering & Research Corp. (2d Cir. 1939)
- Foster Bros. Mfg. Co. v. National Labor Relations Board (4th Cir. 1937)
- Omaha Electric Light & Power Co. v. City of Omaha (8th Cir. 1914)
- Reynolds v. Manhattan Trust Co. (8th Cir. 1901)
- Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co. (Supreme Court of the United States 1944)
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
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.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.