1. Ex parte Burns Copy cite
   4 Balt. C. Rep. 530 Baltimore City Court January 4, 1927
   Not cited

   O’DUNNE, J. Friday, December 31, after conviction of respondent the preceding day, of contempt of Court in giving interview on pending case of Sammons and Neimoth, charged with robbery, of $47,-000 of the Sonneborn payroll, the respondent, through his counsel

2. A. J. Watkins Realty Corp. v. Brotman Copy cite
   4 Balt. C. Rep. 542 Baltimore City Circuit Court January 11, 1927
   Not cited

   STEIN, J. This bill was filed to obtain an injunction prohibiting the corporate defendant from erecting an advertising sign on seven lots of ground in the city on Reisterstown road, sold by the plaintiff to the defendants Brotman *543 and wife, who leased them

3. State v. Rasin Copy cite
   4 Balt. C. Rep. 549 Baltimore City Court January 20, 1927
   Not cited

   O’DUNNE, J. You have been most ably represented by skilled counsel of large experience. You had the benefit before the jury, not only the defense actually interposed, but also one artfully suggested by insinuation and outlined in an opening statement of your

4. Winks v. Gottschalk Copy cite
   4 Balt. C. Rep. 200 Baltimore City Court February 20, 1923
   Not cited

   STUMP, J. Tuesday, February 20th, 1923. Pursuant to adjournment, the Court and jury met in the above entitled cause at 10 o’clock in the forenoon. (Note) At this point the plaintiff rested. (Demurrer prayers were thereupon offered by the defendant and argument

5. State v. Archer Copy cite
   4 Balt. C. Rep. 201 Baltimore City Court April 2, 1923
   Not cited

   STEIN, J. At the close of this case counsel for traversers asked leave to file a list of authorities supporting the principles which they thought would control the verdict in this case; a fter filing which also asked leave to file a. brief discussing the evidence

6. Cull v. Wheltle Copy cite
   3 Balt. C. Rep. 109 Baltimore City Superior Court November 3, 1910
   Not cited

   HARLAN, J.— The question which lies at the root of this controversy is whether the Governor of Maryland, under the Constitution and Laws of the State, has the authority to temporarily suspend the members of the Board of Police Commissioners of Baltimore City,

7. Trustees of the Seventh Baptist Church v. Andrew Copy cite
   2 Balt. C. Rep. 500 Baltimore City Superior Court December 9, 1907
   Not cited

   SHARP, J.- This is an action on a bond, in which the defendants, Andrew and Thomas, are principals, and the American Bonding Company surety. The narr. alleges that Andrew and Thomas entered into a contract under seal with the plaintiff, dated December 16th,

8. Vishnesk v. Jakobowski Copy cite
   1 Balt. C. Rep. 640 Baltimore City Circuit Court April 8, 1897
   Not cited

   STOCKBRIDGE, J. This case comes before the Court at this time upon exceptions which have been filed to the auditor’s accounts A and B, the one being stated by the auditor in accordance with his view of the law, and the other at the request of counsel for Andreas

9. Farnen v. Hooper Copy cite
   1 Balt. C. Rep. 634 Baltimore City Court March 15, 1897
   Not cited

   WICKES, J. The main question involved in the discussion of this demurrer has been - decided in an opinion filed in the case of John F. New vs. Alcaeus Hooper, Mayor of the Oity of Baltimore. In that opinion it is decided that the Old School Board, as it is called

10. In re the Estate of Rhett Copy cite
    1 Balt. C. Rep. 461 Baltimore City Orphans' Court June 30, 1894
    Not cited

    LINDSAY, J., Opinion by in which GANS and EDWARDS, J. J. concur. This matter comes before the Court by petition of Ernestine H. Stevens of the City of Washington, the residuary legatee of the will of Thomas S. Rhett asking the revocation of the letters of

11. Fickey v. Merrefield Copy cite
    1 Balt. C. Rep. 541 Baltimore City Circuit Court November 20, 1895
    Not cited

    WICKES, J. I am of opinion that the third clause of the declaratory decree submitted should be stricken out so far as it provides that the corpus of the estate of Frederick Fiekey in the hands of Joseph Merrefield, the trustee, shall so remain until sale and

12. City & Suburban Railway Co. v. Brush Electric Co. Copy cite
    1 Balt. C. Rep. 542 Baltimore City Circuit Court December 20, 1895
    Not cited

    WRIGHT, J. As I stated at the conclusion of the argument, I do not think the evidence in this case establishes the fact that the proposed erection of the lamp pillars or poles would result in such injury to the plaintiff, as would under the circumstances of this

13. Stewart v. Duvall Copy cite
    1 Balt. C. Rep. 27 Baltimore City Court March 7, 1889
    Not cited

    STEWART, J. The petitioner asks the Court to issue a writ of mandamus, to require a Justice of the Peace to send up the papers in the case of Ilershman vs. Stewart, instituted under the Act of 1888, Chapter 487, on which said justice had rendered a judgment,

14. Warford v. Reaney Copy cite
    1 Balt. C. Rep. 554 Baltimore City Circuit Court April 28, 1896
    Not cited

    DENNIS, J. This case involves the construction of the following clause in the will of Rachel Colvin, viz: “I give and devise unto Richard Colvin Warford and his heirs my house and lot and premises situated at the corner of East Baltimore and Exeter streets, in

15. Detroit Fertilizer & Chemical Co. v. Woolridge Fertilizer Co. Copy cite
    1 Balt. C. Rep. 555 Baltimore City Circuit Court May 13, 1896
    Not cited

    DENNIS, J. Tn August, 1891, Robert A. Wool-ridge was engaged in the fertilizer business in the city, under the name of R. A. Woolridge & Co. He was indebted in the sum of $130,000, of which $98,000 was due to Edmund J. and B. F. Folsom, trading as B. F. Folsom

16. Wolf v. Norman Copy cite
    2 Balt. C. Rep. 522 Baltimore City Circuit Court January 18, 1908
    Not cited

    ELLIOTT, J.— The contention in this cause is as to the ownership of fifteen shares of the capital stock of the State Mutual Building Association. The certificate for said stock is No. 316, issued on the 6th day of May, 1904, and stands in the names of “Margaret

17. Bayly v. Herring Copy cite
    3 Balt. C. Rep. 395 Baltimore City Superior Court February 3, 1916
    Not cited

    GORTER, J.— This suit was brought by Thomas R. Bayly, Jr., against Howard B. Herring on turn promissory notes, dated April 6, 1912. One for $500, due on or before March 1, 1912, and the other for $1,500, due on or before September 1, 1912. The notes bore the

18. John Schonewolf & Co. v. McMillin, Goodchild & Collins Co. Copy cite
    2 Balt. C. Rep. 546 Baltimore City Court June 27, 1908
    Not cited

    SAMS, J.— The attachment in this case was issued by a civil magistrate against a non-resident debtor for unliquidated damages arising out of an action ex contractu. The question to be decided is whether a magistrate has jurisdiction to issue such an attachment

19. Kern v. Kern Copy cite
    3 Balt. C. Rep. 225 Baltimore City Circuit Court November 19, 1912
    Not cited

    BOND, .7.— It appears that the parties in this case separated only upon tlie execution of tlie deed of separation, and not, as in the case of Lemmert vs. Lemmert, IOS Md. 57, prior to that act. In the Lemmert case the court found that tlie abandonment, prior

20. Chapman v. Switzer Copy cite
    3 Balt. C. Rep. 226 Baltimore City Circuit Court November 22, 1912
    Not cited

    BOND, J.— The testimony is not sufficient to prove any fraud or undue influence in the conveyance to the defendant, Mrs. Switzer, of the real property in dispute. I shall .therefore so adjudge in the decree to be signed. *227 But as to tlie decedent’s watcli

Showing the top 500 cases. Narrow your search or add filters to see more.