Legal Opinion
Grinnell Co. v. City of Crisfield
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided February 17, 1972No. [No. 227, September Term, 1971.]PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFinan, J.
The facts leading to this appeal are undisputed. The City of Crisfield, Maryland (City), one of the appellees, being desirous of promoting industrial and employment prospects in its area, entered into an arrangement with one of its local business enterprises, the Rubberset Company (Rubberset), the other appellee, whereby it agreed to finance the construction of a warehouse and lacquer dip addition to the Rubberset plant. 1 The agreement en tered into between the City and Rubberset is normally referred to as the sale-leaseback method of financing, and as the name implies, it provided that…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- City of Frostburg v. JenkinsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- Lerch v. Maryland Port AuthorityCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- Hamilton & Spiegel, Inc. v. Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
- QUEEN COMMISSIONERS OF QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY v. MilesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1967
- Montgomery County Board of Education Ex Rel. Carrier Corp. v. Glassman Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1967
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Barry Properties v. Fick Bros. Roofing Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1976
- Birge v. Town of EastonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- City of Evansville v. Verplank Concrete & Supply, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1980
- Williams v. Anne Arundel CountyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
- Wilson v. Board of County CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.