In re John J. Gibson Co.

Second Circuit

In re John J. Gibson Co.

233 F. 751, 147 C.C.A. 517, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 2519

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedApril 24, 1916

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 233 F. 751 (In re John J. Gibson Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re John J. Gibson Co., 233 F. 751, 147 C.C.A. 517, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 2519 (2d Cir. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant’s objection to the granting of the rehearing in this case after the cause had been decided and his motion to suppress the depositions for the taking of which the rehearing was granted, on the ground that the court below exercised a discretion where no discretion existed, because the complainant was fully apprized of tire existence of the evidence before he brought suit, relied upon proving it in an incompetent manner < and stated no facts showing that he was not financially able to do in May, 1915, what he did in August, 1915, are questions which, if erroneously decided, can be corrected on appeal, and therefore the remedy by mandamus does not lie.

The petition is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The defendant’s objection to the granting of the rehearing in this case after the cause had been decided and his motion to suppress the depositions for the taking of which the rehearing was granted, on the ground that the court below exercised a discretion where no discretion existed, because the complainant was fully apprized of tire existence of the evidence before he brought suit, relied upon proving it in an incompetent manner < and stated no facts showing that he was not financially able to do in May, 1915, what he did in August, 1915, are questions which, if erroneously decided, can be corrected on appeal, and therefore the remedy by mandamus does not lie.

The petition is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 F. 751, 147 C.C.A. 517, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 2519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-john-j-gibson-co-ca2-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack