Legal Opinion

Oak Lane Corporation v. Duke

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 14, 2001No. [No. 14, October Term, 1950 (Adv.).]PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarbury, C. J.

Appellees filed a bill of complaint in the Circuit Court of Baltimore City against the appellant to compel specific performance of a contract of sale in which the appellant was the purchaser. The lots sold were numbers 19, 26, 27, 29, 30 and 31, (all on Oakford Avenue) and numbers 159 and 160 (on Coldspring Lane), in Park Manor, in Baltimore City. Specific performance was resisted, on the ground that there are certain restrictions upon the lots and that the tax sales of certain of them were defective. The Chancellor decreed in favor of complainants, whereupon appellant came here.

The lots are…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McKenrick v. Savings BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1938
  2. Scholtes v. McColganCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1945
  3. Schlicht v. WengertCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1940
  4. Ringgold v. DenhardtCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1920

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. City of Bowie v. MIE, Properties, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  2. Turner v. BrocatoCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
  3. Kirkley v. SeipeltCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1981
  4. Markey v. WolfCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  5. Gnau v. KinleinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958

9 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