Court Opinion

ID: 9771916
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 17:00:12.387746+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:39.687962
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
BEJACH, J.
This cause was disposed of April 19, 1968, at which time it was reversed and remanded for a new trial in the Circuit Court of Shelby County, Tennessee.
Counsel for defendant, Dr. Max Hughes, the defendant in error on the appeal, has filed a petition to rehear. Evidently, however, counsel for petitioner have misconceived the purposes and objects of a petition to rehear, as provided for in Rule 32 of the Revised Rules of this Court. No new argument is brought out in his petition to rehear, nor is it even suggested therein that this Court overlooked any material fact in its original opinion. The petition filed is merely a reargument of the case as heretofore presented in the brief of counsel and argument in open court, except that said petition, in effect, asks for an advisory opinion, by way of declaratory judgment, as to whether the defendant, Dr. Hughes, should, on retrial of the case, rest at the conclusion of plaintiff’s proof or offer proof in his own behalf as he *107did on tlie former trial. This, in our opinion, is not a proper function of a petition to rehear.
The petition to rehear is denied.
Carney, P. J. (W.S.), and Avery, J., concur.