Parish v. Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers Ass'n
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the CourtMcWilliams, J.
The principal question before us is whether the judgment of the chancellor, Moore, J., in the light of Maryland Rule 886, is clearly erroneous. Resolving that question was as arduous as stating it was easy. The events which provoked this litigation were set in motion early in 1954. The original bill of complaint, however, was not filed until February 1965. The second amended bill of complaint was filed in July of that year. The third amended bill of complaint (and its accompanying exhibits) was filed on 28 February 1967 and on 29 March the chancellor, Pugh, J., sustained the demurrers of the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Irving Trust Co. v. DeutschCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- Parish v. Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1968
- Spitze v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1892
- Stevens v. MarcoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Hecht v. Resolution Trust Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
- Sergeant Co. v. PickettCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1979
- In Re DenioSupreme Court of Vermont · 1992
- In Re Quechee Lakes Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1990
- Berneda R. O'Shea v. Commercial Credit CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.