Smith v. Dennison
Illinois Supreme Court
The original opinion in this case was filed in vacation preceding the September term, 1881. The defendant in error filed his petition for a rehearing of the cause, under the 0 rules of this court, which was considered at that term, and denied, the court, however, taking occasion to modify, in some respects, the language of the opinion previously filed, but adhering to its decision already made.
Read the full summary
The original opinion in this case was filed in vacation preceding the September term, 1881. The defendant in error filed his petition for a rehearing of the cause, under the 0 rules of this court, which was considered at that term, and denied, the court, however, taking occasion to modify, in some respects, the language of the opinion previously filed, but adhering to its decision already made. Subsequently, the defendant in error filed his second petition for a rehearing to the present term. Mr. J. L. High, for the defendant in error, insisted that the right to present this second petition…
1Opinion of the Court
Scott, J.:
This second petition for a rehearing can not he entertained. It has never been the practice in this court to permit the filing of a second petition of this character by the same party. Garrick et al. v. Chamberlain, 100 Ill. 476. It matters not that upon the denial of the first petition the court saw proper to modify the language of its opinion previously filed. It is the decision of the court, not so much the reasons which may have been assigned for that decision, that is the subject for reconsideration upon an application for the rehearing of a cause. If the decision originally…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Garrick v. ChamberlainIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by5 opinions
- Merchants' National Bank v. GrunthalSupreme Court of Florida · 1897
- Brandon v. WestNevada Supreme Court · 1906
- Moore v. . HarkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
- Marion Light & Heating Co. v. VermillionIndiana Court of Appeals · 1912
- Welton v. HamiltonIllinois Supreme Court · 1931