Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

F. M. MULLEN v. NORFOLK AND NORTH CAROLINA CANAL COMPANY.

Petition to Rehear.

Where, upon a petition to rehear a case decided in this Court, it does not appear that the decision was hastily made or that any material point of fact or law or any direct authority was overlooked, the rehearing will be refused.

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition to rehear a case in which the opinion was filed last term, 114 N.C. 8. It does not appear that it was decided hastily, nor that any material point of fact or law, or any direct authority, was overlooked. The petition must, therefore, be dismissed. Hudson v. Jordan, 110 N.C. 250, and cases cited in Clark's Code (2 Ed.), 712.

Petition dismissed.

Cited: Weisel v. Cobb, 122 N.C. 70; Hodgin v. Bank, 125 N.C. 503, 511.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MULLEN v. CANAL Co
(Sep 1, 1894)