Furlong v. Riley

Decision Date30 September 1882
Citation104 Ill. 97,1882 WL 10381
PartiesANN FURLONG, Admx.v.MARGARET RILEY et al.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Pending an application for a rehearing in this cause, the petitioner moved the court to stay a decision upon that application until the court should come to the consideration of a certain other case which is on the docket of the present term, the reason assigned for such request being that the same questions are involved in the two cases, and that these questions have been very fully argued in the case now pending.

Messrs. M. A. RORKE & SON, for the motion.

MULKEY, J.:

The avowed purpose of this motion is, that we may be brought to consider arguments and authorities made and presented in another case, as bearing upon the questions involved in the application for a rehearing in this case. This would but be indirectly permitting additional arguments or suggestions in support of the petition for rehearing, after the time prescribed by the rules for the filing of the petition, which, under the prevailing practice in this court, will not be allowed, except upon special cause shown. ( Hawley v. Simmons et al. 101 Ill. 654.) We do not find here any special reasons for deviating from the usual practice. The motion will be denied.

Motion denied.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Copper Queen Mining Co. v. Arizona Prince Copper Co.
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • August 2, 1886
    ...Cal. 190; Knoth v. Barclay, 8 Colo. 305, 7 P. 289; Hawley v. Simmons, 101 Ill. 654, and see Munger v. Jacobson, 100 Ill. 468, and Furlong v. Riley, 104 Ill. 97; Rogers v. Laytin, 81 N.Y. 642. But importance of the case, and the ability with which it has been presented, have induced us to go......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT