Shepard v. Taylor

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Shepard v. Taylor

13 A. 105, 16 R.I. 166, 1888 R.I. LEXIS 17

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedFebruary 18, 1888

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 13 A. 105 (Shepard v. Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shepard v. Taylor, 13 A. 105, 16 R.I. 166, 1888 R.I. LEXIS 17 (R.I. 1888).

Pincite

Opinions

The case Hodges v. New England Screw Co. 3 R.I. 9, decided A.D. 1853, has always since then been regarded as settling the practice of this State in regard to the rehearing of suits in equity on petition. The court then decided as a rule of practice, subject to alteration by a new rule if found necessary, that a rehearing would be granted by the court in its discretion upon petition preferred within a year, even when the error alleged was simply error of law, and the court added that the discretion should be exercised liberally in favor of a rehearing. We think that under this decision the petitioners are entitled to be heard on their petition, and that the motion to dismiss should be overruled. And see Pub. Stat. R.I. cap. 192, § 7, 4th clause; Digest of A.D. 1844, pp. 91, 92.

Order accordingly.

The petition for a rehearing was heard December 31, A.D. 1887, before the chief justice and the four associate justices.

The facts involved are given in 15 R.I. p. 205 sq.

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

The case Hodges v. New England Screw Co. 3 R.I. 9, decided A.D. 1853, has always since then been regarded as settling the practice of this State in regard to the rehearing of suits in equity on petition. The court then decided as a rule of practice, subject to alteration by a new rule if found necessary, that a rehearing would be granted by the court in its discretion upon petition preferred within a year, even when the error alleged was simply error of law, and the court added that the discretion should be exercised liberally in favor of a rehearing. We think that under this decision the petitioners are entitled to be heard on their petition, and that the motion to dismiss should be overruled. And see Pub. Stat. R.I. cap. 192, § 7, 4th clause; Digest of A.D. 1844, pp. 91, 92.

Order accordingly.

The petition for a rehearing was heard December 31, A.D. 1887, before the chief justice and the four associate justices.

The facts involved are given in 15 R.I. p. 205 sq.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A. 105, 16 R.I. 166, 1888 R.I. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shepard-v-taylor-ri-1888.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack