What is a petition for rehearing?

A petition for rehearing is a post-decision request asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its ruling. It must show the Court overlooked controlling law, misapprehended facts, or committed legal error. Success rates are extremely low, and denials are typically summary orders without explanation.

Why were all seventeen petitions consolidated into one order?

The Court consolidated these unrelated cases administratively because all involved the same procedural action—denial of rehearing petitions. This consolidation reflects judicial economy in processing routine denials that require no substantive analysis.

Does denial of a rehearing petition have precedential value?

No. A summary denial of a rehearing petition has no precedential value and adds nothing to the legal analysis of the underlying decision. It simply confirms that the prior ruling stands as the final word in that case.

What happens after a rehearing petition is denied?

Denial of a rehearing petition makes the Supreme Court's prior decision absolutely final. The losing party has exhausted all appellate remedies, and the mandate issues to the lower court for enforcement of the judgment.

General · Landmark

United States v. Morrison; United States Railroad Retirement Board v. Fritz; Waste Management of Wisconsin, Inc. v. Fokakis; Pacileo, Sheriff v. Walker; American Electric Power Co., Inc., et al. v. City of Mishawaka, Indiana, et al.; Shoshone Tribe et al. v. Dry Creek Lodge, Inc., et al.; Brady v. Doe; Maggard v. Florida Parole Commission; Euge v. United States et al.; Papp v. Ohio; In re Gambara; Baloun et al. v. General Motors Corp.; Gooden v. Texas; In re Jackson; In re Beach; In re Lohmann; Proca v. United States

450 U.S. 960·Supreme Court of the United States·1981

Supreme Court denies rehearing petitions in seventeen consolidated cases without opinion.

Summary

This document consolidates seventeen separate Supreme Court orders denying petitions for rehearing. Each case had previously been decided by the Court, and the losing parties sought reconsideration. The Court summarily denied all rehearing petitions without opinion, leaving the prior decisions intact. No substantive legal analysis appears in these orders, as they are purely procedural dispositions confirming the finality of earlier rulings.

Civil ProcedureAppellate Practice

Parties

Various petitioners including United States, United States Railroad Retirement Board, Waste Management of Wisconsin, Inc., Pacileo (Sheriff), American Electric Power Co., Shoshone Tribe, Brady, Maggard, Euge, Papp, Gambara, Baloun, Gooden, Jackson, Beach, Lohmann, and Proca vs. various respondents including Morrison, Fritz, Fokakis, Walker, City of Mishawaka, Dry Creek Lodge, Doe, Florida Parole Commission, United States, Ohio, and General Motors Corp.

Procedural posture

The opinion text is severely truncated and lacks substantive content. These are petitions for rehearing following prior Supreme Court decisions reported at various volume 449 U.S. citations. The Court denied all seventeen petitions for rehearing on February 23, 1981.

Facts

The opinion text is truncated and contains no material facts. The document consists solely of case captions, docket numbers, prior citations, and the procedural notation that petitions for rehearing were denied. No factual background for any of the seventeen consolidated cases is provided in the available text.

Issue

Whether the Supreme Court should grant rehearing in any of the seventeen cases previously decided by the Court?

Holding

The Supreme Court denied all petitions for rehearing, thereby allowing the prior decisions in each case to stand as final.

Rule

A petition for rehearing before the Supreme Court does not automatically entitle a party to reconsideration; the Court exercises broad discretion to deny such petitions summarily without opinion.

Reasoning

The Court provided no reasoning for its denial of the rehearing petitions. Denials of rehearing are typically summary orders without explanation. Under Supreme Court practice, a petition for rehearing is rarely granted and requires showing that the Court overlooked a controlling precedent, misapprehended the facts, or made a legal error. The Court's blanket denial indicates it found no grounds warranting reconsideration in any of the seventeen cases. Each denial is a ministerial act confirming finality rather than a substantive legal determination. Students should understand that rehearing petitions serve as a final procedural step before a Supreme Court decision becomes absolutely final, but success rates are minimal. The lack of any opinion or explanatory text reflects the routine nature of these denials.

Judgment

Petitions for rehearing denied in all seventeen cases.

Why it matters

This consolidated order has minimal substantive significance for 1L doctrine because it involves only procedural denials without legal analysis. However, it illustrates Supreme Court procedure: (1) petitions for rehearing are available but rarely granted; (2) the Court may deny such petitions without explanation; and (3) denial confirms the finality of the underlying decisions. Students studying Civil Procedure should understand that Supreme Court litigation does not necessarily end with the initial decision; parties may file rehearing petitions, though these are almost always unsuccessful.

Opinion

No. 79-395. No. 79-870. No. 79-1679. No. 79-2040. No. 79-2059. No. 80-613. No. 80-707. No. 80-5315. No. 80-5580. No. 80-5585. No. 80-5612. No. 80-5716. No. 80-5725. No. 80-5770. No. 80-5780. No. 80-5782. No. 80-5866. United States v. Morrison, United States Railroad Retirement Board v. Fritz, Waste Management of Wisconsin, Inc. v. Fokakis, Pacileo, Sheriff v. Walker, American Electric Power Co., Inc., et al. v. City of Mishawaka, Indiana, et al., Shoshone Tribe et al. v. Dry Creek Lodge, Inc., et al., Brady v. Doe, Maggard v. Florida Parole Commission, Euge v. United States et al., Papp v. Ohio, In re Gambara, Baloun et al. v. General Motors Corp., Gooden v. Texas, In re Jackson, In re Beach, In re Lohmann, Proca v. United States, [MAJORITY] 449 U. S. 361; 449 U. S. 166; 449 U. S. 1060; 449 U. S. 86; 449 U. S. 1096; 449 U. S. 1118; 449 U. S. 1081; 449 U. S. 960; 449 U. S. 1065; 449 U. S. 1065; 449 U. S. 1087; 449 U. S. 1090; 449 U. S. 1072; 449 U. S. 1075; 449 U. S. 1076; 449 U. S. 1109; and 449 U. S. 1093. Petitions for rehearing denied.