Legal Opinion

Hamilton v. Trundle

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 13, 1905PublishedCited by 14 opinions

Appeal from Circuit Court No. 2 of Baltimore City (Sharp, J.)

1Opinion of the CourtBoyd, J.

This is an appeal from an order of Circuit Court No. 2, of Baltimore City, allowing the appellee a counsel fee for services in this Court and in the Court below in the case of Joynes et al., v. Hamilton et al., decided at the January Term, 1904, of this Court, 98 Md. 665. It was a special case stated, under the provisions of Art. 16, secs. 184, etc., of the Code. The controversy there was a construction of the eighth clause of the will of William Hamilton and the codicil to his will. By that clause the testator had left to Evelyn and Julia Joynes, his granddaughters, a lot of ground on…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Singer v. Fidelity and Deposit Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1903
  2. Buchanan v. LloydCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1885
  3. Joynes v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1904

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Empire Realty Co. v. FleisherCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
  2. Taylor v. WahbyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
  3. Colonial Carpets, Inc. v. Carpet Fair, Inc.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1977
  4. Skeens v. PaternoCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1984
  5. Rice v. Biltmore Apartments Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1922

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API