Legal Opinion

Mateer v. Brown

California Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1850PublishedCited by 3 opinions

This was a re-hearing of the case of Mateer v. Brown, {ante, p. 221.)

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

BeNNett, J.

A re-hearing having been granted in this case, it has been a second time argued. It is objected that the court has not the power to review its former judgment. The remittitur not having been sent to, nor filed with, the court below, we still have control over the cause. (See Grogan & Lent v. Ruckle, ante, p. 193, and cases there cited.)

Tbe counsel for the plaintiff asks us to modify our former *232judgment, and decide that certain facts were proved at the trial, by evidence independent of that which we held in our former decision to be incompetent. The determination…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marquand v. WebbNew York Supreme Court · 1819
  2. Osgood v. President & Directors of the Manhattan Co.New York Supreme Court · 1824

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Rowland v. KreyenhagenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
  2. Edye v. RobertsonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York · 1883
  3. In re the Estate of JessupCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889

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

Powered by the Exa API