Court Opinion

ID: 9868644
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 18:46:19.524127+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:52.306185
License: Public Domain

On Petition to Behear.
Petition to rehear has been filed and met by motion on the part of respondents to dismiss the petition for its failure to comply with Buie 32 of this Court, 173 Tenn. 886. The petition to rehear contains nine assignments of error directed at our former opinion. Copies of the petition have been mailed to each member of the Court and have been carefully considered. It is clear from the body of the petition that the argument made to support the assignments of error is entirely a repetition of the argument made in briefs and argument of counsel presented to the Court before our original decision of the cause. While we sympathize with the zeal of counsel in representing his client and can understand his disappointment at losing his suit, Andrews v. Crenshaw, 51 Tenn. 151, 152, the reargument of the case as it is presented in the petition to rehear does not induce us to depart from Buie 32 of the Court, or to re-open the case. Railroad v. Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 125 Tenn. 658, 691 and 692, 148 S. W. 671.
We think the motion to dismiss is well made, that the petition fails to comply with Buie 32 of the Court, and for that reason the motion is sustained and the petition to rehear is dismissed.
All concur.