Legal Opinion

McDowell, Pyle & Co. v. Hopfield

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 9, 1925PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAVaesii, J.

Tlie question to be determined in this case is whether or not the claim of a prior assignee of a chose in action, where no notice of the assignment was given to the debtor, is superior to the claim of a subsequent attaching creditor who has secured a judgment of condemnation against the debtor as garnishee.

McDowell, Pyle & Company of Baltimore City became indebted to Wirth Concord Ade Company of Providence, Rhode Island; in the sum of $332.86 for merchandise purchased at various times .in July, 1923. The money thus due from McDowell, Pyle & Company. was assigned by Wirth Concord Ade Company…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Wood v. PartridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
  2. Walters v. Washington Ins.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1855
  3. Brown v. SomervilleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1855
  4. Cramer v. RoderickCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1916
  5. Baldwin ex rel. Owens v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1845

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Russell v. Fred G. Pohl Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1951
  2. Maryland Cooperative Milk Producers, Inc. v. BellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
  3. Seymour v. Finance & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1928
  4. Pen Mar Co. v. AshmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1927
  5. Bank of Bethesda v. KochCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1979

4 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