Terrazas v. Ramirez
Texas Supreme Court
1Opinion
*755OPINION ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING
HECHT, Justice.
Despite the statement in our judgment of December 17, 1991, that “[n]o motions for rehearing shall be entertained”, some of the real parties in interest in this original proceeding, plaintiffs in the district court, have moved for leave to file a motion for rehearing.1 Their motion for leave is denied.
Our authority to dispense with motions for rehearing in a particular case is recognized in Rule 190(a), Tex.R.App.P., which states in part: “In exceptional cases, if the ends of justice require, the court may shorten the time…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Sterling v. FergusonTexas Supreme Court · 1932
- Mauzy v. Legislative Redistricting BoardTexas Supreme Court · 1971
- Smith v. CraddickTexas Supreme Court · 1971
- Sears v. BayoudTexas Supreme Court · 1990
- Spears v. DavisTexas Supreme Court · 1966
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.