Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/235/407/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/235/407/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Scotten v. Littlefield, 235 U.S. 407 (1914)
Scotten v. Littlefield
No. 439
Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted October 13, 1914
Decided December 14, 1914
235 U.S. 407
Syllabus
Bills of review are on two grounds: first, error of law apparent on the face of the record without further examination of matter of fact; second, new facts discovered since the decree, which should materially affect the decree and probably induce a different result.
An aspect of the claim involved cannot be held back when the case is presented to the court and later made the subject of a bill of review. Although the decision of the district court which determined the case sought to be reviewed is alleged to have been decided upon principles inconsistent with a subsequent decision by this Court, the subsequent decision will not lay the foundation for a bill of review for errors of law apparent, or for new matter in pais discovered since the decree and requiring a different result.
213 F.7d 5 affirmed.
The facts, which involve the principles of law upon which bills of review are granted and their application to this case, are stated in the opinion.
