Legal Opinion

Boro Hall Corporation v. General Motors Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided August 19, 1942No. 94PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judge.

The petition for a rehearing as well as the affidavits in answer and reply-are entirely irregular as documents for submission in connection with a motion for rehearing since there is nothing properly before this court except the record on appeal. They may be considered, however, as upon an application for leave to file a petition in the District Court to reopen the case and to remand the cause to that court for further proceedings. Gairing Tool Co. v. Eclipse Interchangeable Counterbore Co., 6 Cir., 1930, 48 F.2d 73, 75. Such an application should be…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Gairing Tool Co. v. Eclipse Interchangeable Counterbore Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1931
  2. B. S. Pearsall Butter Co. v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1923

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. National Screen Service Corporation v. The Poster Exchange, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
  2. Salco Corporation, Formerly Known and Doing Business as Denver Buick, Inc. v. General Motors Corporation, Buick Motor DivisionCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1975
  3. Boro Hall Corp. v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
  4. United States v. San Francisco Electrical Contractors Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1944
  5. Kaiser v. General Motors Corp.(Pontiac Motor Div.)District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API