Legal Opinion

Spivey v. Harris

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 7, 1985No. 94 & 366, September Term, 1985PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BISHOP, Judge.

In Nisos v. Nisos, 60 Md.App. 368, 376, 483 A.2d 97, 101 (1984) (opinion issued November 8, 1984), and in Harmon v. Harmon, 61 Md.App. 554, 558, 487 A.2d 689, 691 (1985) (opinion issued February 8, 1985), this Court warned the bar that serious violations of the Rules could result in summary dismissal. The cases sub judice were consolidated on June 7, 1985, for briefing and argument. Appellant was on adequate notice that failure to comply with the Rules could be fatal. We stated in Kemp-Pontiac-Cadillac v. S & M Constr., 33 Md.App. 516, 521, 365 A.2d 1021, 1024 (1976):

These rules…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Kemp-Pontiac-Cadillac, Inc. v. S & M CONSTR. CO., INC.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1976
  2. Nisos v. NisosCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1984
  3. Harman v. HarmanCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1985

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Jacobs v. AdamsCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1986
  2. Atlantic Food & Beverage Systems, Inc. v. City of AnnapolisCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1987
  3. Leaf Co. v. Montgomery CountyCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API