Cotham and Maldonado v. Board of County Commissioners
Court of Appeals of Maryland
September Term, 1970.]
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
We are here called upon to decide the proper interpretation of what is now Code (1970 Cum. Supp.), Art. 57, § 18 relative to the notice required of claims against cer tain counties in a situation where the plaintiff’s declaration does not recite giving the notice within the statutory period, but says “upon discovery of the negligence of the Defendants [she] gave timely notice.” We are also obliged to construe the statute relative to its application to a third party claim. The facts are not in dispute.
Durley Cotham (Cotham), appellant in No. 15, was a patient in Prince George’s County General…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Vance v. VanceSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Hahn v. ClaybrookCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1917
- Neuenschwander v. Washington Suburban Sanitary CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1946
- Waldman v. RohrbaughCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
- Mumford v. Staton, Whaley & PriceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Attorney General v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- Condon v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
- Slate v. ZitomerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission v. Riverdale Heights Volunteer Fire Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1987
- People Ex Rel. Department of Transportation v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.