Legal Opinion

Turk v. Grossman

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 6, 1939No. [Nos. 42 and 43, April Term, 1939.]PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParke, J.

The questions on these appeals arise on demurrers to pleadings in equity. A bill of complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of Baltimore City by Lloyd E. Mitchell, Incorporated, and Elise A. Grossman, against Karl Turk, Sr., individually and as sole remaining executor of the estate of Heinrich Turk, deceased, Margaret M. Turk, wife of Karl Turk, Sr., Herman 0. Weinholt, and W. Graham Boyce, defendants. By agreement of the parties Thekle Weinholt, wife of the defendant, Herman 0. Weinholt, was made a party defendant as though she had originally been a party defendant, and all the allegations…

2Cases cited74 opinions

  1. Hammond v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Hoffman Steam Coal Co. v. Cumberland Coal & Iron Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1860
  3. Clark v. SimmonsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
  4. Bon v. GravesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  5. Anderson v. GoodwinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906

69 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. People's Drug Stores, Inc. v. WindhamCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1940
  2. Tribull v. TribullCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1956
  3. United States v. Miscellaneous JewelryDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1987
  4. Hayman, Adm'r v. MessickCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
  5. Goldman v. RubinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API