Legal Opinion

Sullivan Bros. Coal Co. v. Simpson

Baltimore City Court

Decided January 21, 1924Published

1Opinion of the Court

BOND, DUKE, J.

Prom the declaration in the short note case in this proceeding it appears that this suit is for the recovery of damages for the alleged breach of the defendant of an alleged contract for the sale of coal by the defendant to the plaintiff.

The defendant has moved that the attachment be quashed on the ground that the amended voucher or account filed by the plaintiff does not meet the requirements of Section 4 of Article 9 of the Code to the effect that “the creditor shall produce the bond, account or other evidence of debts, by which the debtor is indebted.”

In the ease of Burk vs.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cox v. WatersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1870
  2. Burk v. TinsleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1894

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

Powered by the Exa API