World's Columbian Exposition Co. v. Republic of France
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
In Error to tlie Circuit Court of tbe United States for tbe Northern Division of tbe Northern District of Illinois.
1Opinion of the Court
WOODS, Circuit Judge.
By tbe practice of this court, only tbe ‘judges who joined in rendering a decision are responsible for tbe .granting or refusing of a petition for a rehearing. While therefore technically true, it is not a ground of just criticism, “that in cases like the present, under the act of congress establishing the court (31 C. C. A. cxviii., 90 Fed. cxviii.) and under rule 27 (31 C. C. A. cxviii., 90 Fed. cxviii.), a petition for a rehearing may be granted when a majority of the court were not present at the original hearing, and could not be familiar with the oral argument…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Norris v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Insurance Co. v. FolsomSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Martinton v. FairbanksSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- World's Columbian Exposition v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1893
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. OlveraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1941
- Munger Automobile Co. v. American Lloyds of DallasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
- Interstate Compress Co. v. AgnewCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1919
- Langford v. NevinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
- Keene Mach. Co. v. BarrattCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1900
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.