Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Silberstein v. Epstein

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 21, 1924Published

1Concurrence

BoND, J.,

filed a concurring opinion as follows:

The opinion prepared by Judge Umer seems to me to express perfectly the conclusion of all the judges, including myself, on the facts and on the principles of law which the majority of the judges accept as the basis of decision. But I think the case should be decided upon a different ground, one which has not been adopted by the majority of the Court. I am rather strongly o-f opinion that the question of the applicability of the redemption -statutes to such a relation as that established under this lease needs to be reconsidered. And it seems to-…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Terral v. Burke Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
  2. Chesapeake & Ohio Canal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Rail RoadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1832
  3. Mayor of Baltimore v. Root ex rel. ArmstrongCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1855
  4. Banks v. HaskieCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1876
  5. Mitchell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1911

11 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