Legal Opinion

Leganshuk v. Department of Liquor Control

Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Franklin County, Civil Division

Decided August 3, 1953No. 187390Published

1Opinion of the Court

*403OPINION

By BARTLETT, J.

APPLICATION FOR REHEARING DENIED.

The so-called motion for a new trial will be considered as an application for a rehearing. No oral argument is permitted on a motion for rehearing. Hughes v. Roberts, 18 Abs 438, 439.

Sole office of such application is to direct Court’s attention to matters of fact or law that have not been given attention; not to merely rehash same matters. White v. Columbus, et al., 27 Abs 487, 496. However, the Court has given attention to the brief in support of rehearing and has reexamined its original decision.

Counsel for appellant urges that the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hughes v. RobertsOhio Court of Appeals · 1934
  2. Bowytz v. Tax CommissionOhio Court of Appeals · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API