Harford v. Lloyd E. Mitchell, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the CourtMcWilliams, J.
The trial judge, Dyer, J., relying upon Combustion Engineering Co. v. Hunsberger, 171 Md. 16, 187 A. 825 (1936), directed a verdict in favor of the appellee (Mitchell) against the appellant (Harford), plaintiff below, at the conclusion of Harford’s case. We think he should have relied upon Fields v. Reid-Hayden, Inc., 188 Md. 449, 53 A. 2d 24 (1947), in which we distinguished Hunsberger and followed Clough & Molloy, Inc. v. Shilling, 149 Md. 189, 131 A. 343 (1925). Had he done so we think he would have been obliged to deny Mitchell’s motion, thereby shifting to it the burden of going forward…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Strasburger v. VogelCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1906
- Clough & Molloy, Inc. v. ShillingCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1925
- Munzert v. American Stores Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
- Leikach v. Royal Crown Bottling Co. of Baltimore, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1971
- Leidenfrost v. Atlantic Masonry, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Parrillo v. Giroux Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1981
- Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. v. HicksCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Giles v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994