Court Opinion

ID: 9655120
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 19:00:39.171706+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:16.185286
License: Public Domain

On Petition to Rehear
HOWARD, J.
The contestant herein has filed a petition to rehear respectfully complaining that her case was incorrectly decided. In support of the petition learned counsel make an able and earnest argument, but it is only a reargument of matters already painstakingly considered and determined by us. It points out no new matter not heretofore considered, but only reargues things which counsel say were erroneously decided by us.
“The office of a petition to rehear is to call the attention of the court to matters overlooked, not to those things which counsel supposes were improperly decided after full consideration.” Louisville & N. Railroad Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 125 Tenn. 658, 691, 148 S. W. 671, 680; Gulf, M. & O. R. Co. v. Underwood, 182 Tenn. 467, 476, 187 S. W. (2d) 777, 780; Rule 32, 185 Tenn. 879; Colbaugh v. State, 188 Tenn. 103, 112, 216 S. W. (2d) 741; Black v. Love & Amos Coal Co., 30 Tenn. App. 377, 389, 206 S. W. (2d) 432, 437, and cases there cited.
Therefore, the petition is denied at petitioner’s costs.
McAmis, P. J., and Hale, J., concurring.