Court Opinion

ID: 9833984
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:12:15.376563+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:10.200932
License: Public Domain

On Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing.
Our attention is called to tfie record, which shows that prior to the trial of tfiis cause in tfie court below John Barton Payne succeeded Walker D. Hines as Director General of Railroads, and was named Federal Agent by the President under section 206 of tfie Transportation Act 1920, and tfie judgment was rendered against John Barton Payne, and not against Walker D. Hines, as stated in our opinion affirming tfie judgment of tfie trial court, and said opinion is reformed in that respect so as to show that tfie judgment is affirmed in favor of appellee, B. Morrow, against John Barton Payne, appellant. However, tfie original style of said case will be retained on tfie docket of tfiis court, and tfie style of said suit as stated in appellant’s motion will be changed, as requested, to Walker D. Hines, Appellant, v. B. Morrow, Appellee.
It is further made to appear by said motion that since the trial of tfiis cause in tfie court below and appeal to tfiis court, James C. Davis has succeeded John Barton Payne as Director General of Railroads and Fed1 eral Agent, and, as per tfie request of said motion, it is ordered tliat tfie said James O. Davis be, and fie is hereby, substituted as appellant, and that in the further proceedings herein fie, and not John Barton Payne or tfie said Walker D. Hines, be named as appellant.
We have carefully considered motion anent granting rehearing, and, not finding any valid reason why we should not adhere to our views as expressed in opinion, said motion is overruled.