REHEARING. A second consideration which the court gave to a cause on a second argument.
In England a case heard by the Chancellor on appeal from the Master of the Rolls, etc., is a rehearing; Emerson v. Davies, 1 W. & M. 21, Fed. Cas. No. 4,437.
A rehearing cannot be granted by the su preme court after the record has been re mitted to the court below ; Browder v. Mc Arthur, 7 Wheat. (U. S.) 58, 5 L. Ed. 397.
Where any judge, who concurred in the decision, thinks proper to have a rehearing, the motion for one will be considered, other wise it will be denied as of course; Brooks v. Reynolds, 59 Fed. 923, 8 C. C. A. 370, 16 U. S. App. 713.
Where the grounds for a rehearing were not brought to the attention of the court at the argument or by brief, permission to re argue will be granted only in extreme cases; U. S. v. Hall, 63 Fed. 472, 11 C. C. A. 294, 21 U. S. App. 426; and not where the ques tions have already been fully considered; Imperial Life Ins. Co. v. Newcomb, 63 Fed. 560, 11 C. C. A. 340, 27 U. S. App. 290; and not when the ground was not overlooked at the former trial ; Clark v. Five Hundred and Five Thousand Feet of Lumber, 70 Fed. 1020, 17 C. C. A. 555, 34. U. S. App. 45. That a judgment of affirmance was by an equal de cision of the judges merely, affords no ground for granting a rehearing ; People v. New York, 25 Wend. (N. Y.) 256, 35 Am. Dec. 669. See PRECEDENT.
The practice in the federal courts is to file a petition for a rehearing which, with the argument in its support, is submitted, with out oral argument, for the consideration of the court.
When a motion for a new trial of an ac tion at law and a petition for rehearing have been denied, equity will not entertain a bill to set the judgment aside on the same grounds alleged in the motion and petition; Hendrickson v. Bradley, 85 Fed. 508, 29 C. C. A. 303.
The refusal of the circuit court to grant a rehearing is not the subject of review ; Hardin v. Boyd, 113 U. S. 756, 5 Sup. Ct. 771, 28 L. Ed. 1141.
Courts, especially in cases of general inter est, order a reargumeut where they are in doubt or where the case was not argued be fore a full bench. In Taylor v. Young, 71 Pa. 81, eminent counsel not connected with the cause petitioned the court for a reargu on the ground that the judgment was not well considered and that it would unset tle titles to real estate. A reargument was ordered and the former decision was revers ed. See REOPENING CASE; BILL OF REVIEW.
When the merits have been decided on ap peal, the circuit court cannot without leave of the supreme court grant a new trial, re hearing or review or hear new defences by amendment to the answer ; In re Potts, 166 U. S. 263, 17 Sup. Ct. 520, 41 L. Ed. 994. After the mandate has gone down to the lower court, an application for a rehearing must be made in the appellate court. See BILL OF REVIEW.