Legal Opinion

Gimbel v. Gimbel

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 17, 1925PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWalsh, J.

The sole question presented in these eases is whether or not money deposited in trust for two people in a building association “subject to the order of both only” can, under the evidence in the record, be found to have been so deposited by mistake, and the original depositor authorized to withdraw it without the consent of the other party.

The appellee is a widow, sixty-five years of age, and has three children, John, who is not a party to these proceedings, and Frederick 'and Elizabeth, who, together with the Gárrison Lane Building and Saving's Association ISTo. 1, are the appellants. In…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Milholland v. WhalenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1899
  2. Coburn v. ShillingCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1921
  3. Littig v. Vestry of Mount Calvary Protestant Episcopal ChurchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1905
  4. Mathias v. FowlerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1915
  5. Farmer v. FarmerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1920

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Edwards v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1951
  2. Ghingher v. FanseenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1934
  3. Bradford v. Eutaw Savings BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1946
  4. Simmont v. SimmontCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1931
  5. Bollack v. BollackCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1935

8 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