No. 437. FLEming, TemporARY CONTROLS ADMINISTRATOR, v. HILLS. Woods, Housing Expediter, substituted for Fleming, Temporary Controls Administrator. No. 232, Misc. WOODS v. RAGEN, WARDEN. Supreme Court of Illinois. Certiorari denied. The motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus is also denied. Reported below: 393 Ill. 586, 66 N. E. 2d 881. No. 265, Misc. No. 274, Misc. tions denied. No. 264, Misc. No. 271, Misc. MCMILLAN v. EAST, JUDGE; and RUTHVEN V. OVERHOLSER; and BLANTON v. NORTH CAROLINA. The motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus are denied. No. 262, Misc. STEINBERG v. SPEAKMAN, JUDGE. The motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus is denied.. Certiorari Granted. No. 53, Misc. GRYGER V. BURKE, WARDEN; and No. 55, Misc. TOWNSEND v. BURKE, WARDEN. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Certiorari granted. Petitioners pro se. John H. Maurer for respondent. Certiorari Denied. (See also No. 232, Misc., supra.) No. 474. ORMONT, DOING BUSINESS AS ACME MEAT Co., v. CLARK, DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION OF LIQUIDATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. United States Emergency Court of Appeals. Certiorari denied. William Katz for petitioner. Solicitor General Perlman, Assistant Attorney General Quinn, Robert S. Erdahl and Josephine H. Klein for respondent. Reported below: 164 F. 2d 354. No. 476. BLUE STAR AUTO STORES, INC. v. MCCOMB, WAGE & HOUR ADMINISTRATOR. C. C. A. 7th. Certiorari denied. Samuel E. Hirsch and Julian H. Levi for petitioner. Solicitor General Perlman, John R. Benney, William S. Tyson and Bessie Margolin for respondent. Reported below: 164 F. 2d 329. No. 478. HANSON ET AL., DOING BUSINESS AS SEVENTEEN FOR THE JUNIOR TEENS, v. TRIANGLE PUBLICATIONS, INC. C. C. A. 8th. Certiorari denied. Howard Elliott for petitioners. Frank B. Murdoch and Samuel H. Liberman for respondent. Reported below: 163 F. 2d 74. No. 488. GATELY v. HARITON ET AL. United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Certiorari denied. James P. Burns for petitioner. Milton Strasburger for respondents. No. 200, Misc. HOLLER v. UNITED STATES. C. C. A. 8th. Certiorari denied. Petitioner pro se. Solicitor General Perlman, Assistant Attorney General Quinn, Robert S. Erdahl and Philip R. Monahan for the United States. Reported below: 164 F. 2d 697. No. 230, Misc. BAILEY v. NIERSTHEIMER, WARDEN. Supreme Court of Illinois. Certiorari denied. No. 238, Misc. BAXTER V. RAGEN, WARDEN. Criminal Court of Cook County, Illinois. Certiorari denied.. No. 247, Misc. HAMBY V. RAGEN, WARDEN. Criminal Court of Cook County, Illinois. Certiorari denied. No. 257, Misc. CORDTS v. RAGEN, WARDEN. Circuit Court of St. Clair County, Illinois. Certiorari denied. No. 268, Misc. Ross v. ILLINOIS. Supreme Court of Illinois. Certiorari denied. No. 269, Misc. ROBINSON V. RAGEN, WARDEN. Criminal Court of Cook County, Illinois. Certiorari denied. No. 270, Misc. THOMPSON v. ILLINOIS. Supreme Court of Illinois. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 398 Ill. 114, 75 N. E. 2d 345. No. 275, Misc. HARPER V. MICHIGAN. Supreme Court of Michigan. Certiorari denied. No. 278, Misc. BERNARD V. BRADY, WARDEN. C. C. A. 4th. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 164 F. 2d 881. Rehearing Denied. No. 55. GOLDSMITH V. UNITED STATES, ante, p. 539. Rehearing denied. No. 56. WEISS v. UNITED STATES, ante, p. 539. Rehearing denied. No. 57. FEIGENBAUM V. UNITED STATES, ante, p. 539. Rehearing denied. No. 170. DIXON V. AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO. ET AL., ante, p. 764. The motion for leave to file a second petition for rehearing is denied. AMENDMENT OF RULES. ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that Rule 33 of the Rules of this Court be, and it hereby is, amended to read as follows: "33 "REHEARING "1. Of judgments or decisions other than those denying or granting certiorari.-A petition for rehearing may be filed with the clerk, in term time or in vacation, when accompanied by proof of service on the adverse party, within fifteen days after judgment or decision, unless the time is shortened or enlarged by the Court or a justice thereof. Such petition must be printed and forty copies thereof furnished. It must briefly and distinctly state its grounds, and be supported by a certificate of counsel to the effect that it is presented in good faith and not for delay. A petition for rehearing is not subject to oral argument, and will not be granted, unless a justice who concurred in the judgment or decision desires it, and a majority of the Court so determines. "(a) A response, if printed and forty copies thereof furnished, accompanied by proof of service, may be filed with the clerk within ten days after service of petition, unless the time is shortened or enlarged by the Court or a justice thereof. Such response is not required, and the Court will not delay its action upon a petition for rehearing to await a response thereto, unless a response is requested by the Court. "2. Of orders on petitions for writs of certiorari.—A petition for rehearing may be filed with the clerk in term time or in yacation, subject to the requirements respecting time, service, printing, and number of copies furnished as provided in paragraph 1 of this rule. Any petition filed under this paragraph must briefly and distinctly state grounds which are confined to intervening circumstances of substantial or controlling effect (e. g., Sanitary Refrigerator Co. v. Winters, 280 U. S. 30, 34, footnote 1; Massey v. United States, 291 U. S. 608), or to other substantial grounds available to petitioner although not previously presented (e. g., Schriber-Schroth Co. v. Cleveland Trust Co., 305 U. S. 47, 50). Such petition is not subject to oral argument. A petition for rehearing filed under this paragraph must be supported by a certificate of counsel to the effect that it is presented in good faith and not for delay, and counsel must also certify that the petition is restricted to the grounds above specified. "(a) A response, if printed and forty copies thereof furnished, accompanied by proof of service, may be filed with the clerk within ten days after service of petition, unless the time is shortened or enlarged by the Court or a justice thereof." IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Rule as herein amended shall be applicable to all cases in which the action of the Court is taken after January 1, 1948. OCTOBER 13, 1947. |