
    *Carlisle and Waddle v. Wm. McDonald.
    .Cause decided in bank, rehearing can only be allowed at the same term, in the same court.
    This cause came before the court upon a motion to dismiss an order for a rehearing upon the following petition and allowing : “To the honorable the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio, the petition of Carlisle and Waddle respectfully represents, that they have prosecuted a bill in chancery v. McDonald, which came before the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio, at their special session at Columbus, in December, 1833, for decision, which bill, answer, and replication, with exhibits and depositions, are, as upon reference to them, will appear, and which are made part of this petition. That the said Supreme Court, at their said special session, pronounced a decree dismissing said bill. Tour petitioners humbly request that the said cause be reheard, for reasons apparent on the said proceedings and decree, and full equity done in the premises, and your petitioners will pray.”
    
      G. Swan, for complainant.
    The prayer of the foregoing petition is allowed.
    “E. Lane,
    J. O. Wright,
    
      “December 21, 1833. Judges Supreme Court."
    
    Leonard,
    in support of the motion to dismiss;
    A rehearing is never allowed on a bill of review, or on a supplemental bill in the nature of a bill of review. Cowp. E<j. 93, 94, 96; 2 Mad. Oh. 404-407.
    E. Douglass, on the same side.
    Gr. Swan, contra.
   Judge Collett,

delivered the opinion of the court;

Two judges can allow a rehearing of a cause decided on the circuit, where two judges hold the court and make the decree.. But upon a decision in bank, a rehearing can only be allowed in open court in bank. The motion to dismiss must prevail.  