Legal Opinion
R. H. McWilliams, Jr., Co. v. Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co.
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Decided October 29, 1937PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor:
The petition rests on a claim that newly discovered evidence has been found which, if produced and accepted as true, would result in either a denial of the original application for allowance or in a material reduction of the amount which the order awarded. The order that is sought to be opened was entered nearly one year ago, viz., on December 23, 1936.
Whether the petition be regarded as one for a new trial of the application for allowance or for leave to file a bill of review is immaterial, in view of what I regard as the controlling consideration in this particular case.
A…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Dexter v. ArnoldU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1829
- Vansant v. KowalewskiSuperior Court of Delaware · 1914
- Massie v. GrahamU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Ohio · 1842
- Crites v. Photometric Products Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1933
- Crites v. Photometric Products Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1933
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co. v. WarrickSupreme Court of Delaware · 1941
- In re Missori-Kansas Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1941
- Warrick v. Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1940
- R. H. McWilliams, Jr., Co. v. Missouri-Kansas Pipe Line Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1938