O'Driscoll v. Scott
This text of 176 A. 170 (O'Driscoll v. Scott) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
As to the merits of the original decision, we concur in the result reached by the Supreme Court, and for the reasons given in the per curiam opinion of that court.
Application was made in the Supreme Court for a rehearing, on the ground, in substance, of newly discovered evidence to show what the evidence before the original trial body had been; and that application was denied. A reversal of that denial is now sought in this court. We need only say that the granting or refusal of a rehearing was a matter wholly within the discretion of the Supreme Court, and is not reviewable here.
The judgment of the Supreme Court is affirmed, with costs.
For affirmance — The Chambéelos, Paekee, Lloyd, Case, Boduste, Donees, Pebskie, Van Buskiek, Kays, Heteield, Deae, Wells, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
176 A. 170, 114 N.J.L. 265, 1935 N.J. LEXIS 219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/odriscoll-v-scott-nj-1935.