Legal Opinion
Brodsky v. Hull
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided December 8, 1950No. [No. 43, October Term, 1949.]PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDelaplaine, J.
This is an action for damages for breach of a contract for the sale of a residence at 2820 Cheswolde Road in the city of Baltimore. The issue in this case is whether Louis H. Brodsky and wife, the purchasers, can recover from Charles H. Hull and wife, the sellers, the partial payment of $1,000 and other alleged damages.
The description of the property in the advertisement of C. Mayo Company, realtors, contained the words “about one acre lot.” Plaintiffs came to see the property, which is located in the Mount Washington section, on July 31, 1948. On August 1 they came again, this time…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Robertson v. ParksCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1892
- Cahill v. ApplegarthCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1904
- Baltimore Permanent Building & Land Society v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1880
- Jones v. PlaterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1844
- Babb v. BolyardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Gross v. Sussex Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
- Nails v. S & R, INC.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
- Appel v. HupfieldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- Homa v. Friendly Mobile Manor, Inc.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- Chesapeake Homes, Inc. v. McGrathCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1968
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.