Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hammond v. Lyon Realty Co.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 30, 1932No. [Nos. 1, 2, October Term, 1932.]Published

1Concurrence

As indicated by the per curiam opinion, the five judges who concur in an affirmance do so upon distinct grounds, in none of which a sufficient number agree to constitute a majority. In this situation, Offutt, J., has set forth his views in a full and forceful manner and Sloan, J., wholly concurs in them. In view of the division of the court and of the importance of the questions involved, the writer of this opinion believes a statement of his position should, with deference for the convictions of his brethren, be expressed.

The two appeals on the record are from the decrees of the chancellor…

2Cases cited64 opinions

  1. Coder v. ArtsSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  2. Sexton v. Kessler & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
  3. Van Iderstine v. National Discount Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
  4. Hoffman Steam Coal Co. v. Cumberland Coal & Iron Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1860
  5. Booth v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1881

59 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