Eva Hines v. Royal Indemnity Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a motion to recall judgment and mandate that \attacks the correctness of the judgment as a matter of law . . . . is obviously a petition for rehearing under a different name\, and denying such motion as not timely filed
• the Rules “apply to procedure in the district courts, not to 18 the Court of Appeals.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).