Legal Opinion

Shpritz v. Baltimore Trust Co.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 1, 1926PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWalsh, J.

The chief question to be determined in this case is whether the lower court was-correct in instructing the jury that there was no evidence in the case legally sufficient to show that the appellee had any knowledge or notice of fraud, or want or failure of consideration, in the making of two one thousand dollar notes given by the appellant to Bernstein, Cohen & Coihpany, and by the latter endorsed to the appellee as collateral security for a loan. The record shows that Max Cohen, trading as Bernstein, Cohen & Company, and hereinafter referred to as Cohen, conducted a private banking business…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Black v. Bank of WestminsterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1903
  2. Edelen v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1921
  3. Harford National Bank v. RutledgeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1914
  4. State ex rel. Millard & Waring v. GreenCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1819

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Blacher v. Nat. Bank of Balto.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1926
  2. Dean v. Eastern Shore Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1930
  3. Home Credit Co. v. FouchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1928
  4. Cooke v. Real Estate Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API