Laflin & Rand Powder Co. v. Sinsheimer
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The case is stated iu the opinion of the Court. Exception. — At the trial, the plaintiff offered the two following prayers: 1. If the jury shall find that at the time the articles dated February 6th, 1816, were signed, and the acknowledgment and affidavits of Kraus and Rittenberg thereto annexed, and were made at the time when said articles so acknowledged with said affidavits annexed, were filed with the Secretary of the…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The case is stated iu the opinion of the Court. Exception. — At the trial, the plaintiff offered the two following prayers: 1. If the jury shall find that at the time the articles dated February 6th, 1816, were signed, and the acknowledgment and affidavits of Kraus and Rittenberg thereto annexed, and were made at the time when said articles so acknowledged with said affidavits annexed, were filed with the Secretary of the State of West Virginia, for the purpose of procuring the certificate of incorporation of the Lancaster Furnace and Mining…
1Opinion of the CourtBrent, J.
This is an action of assumpsit to recover from the appellees for merchandise sold, and for which it is claimed'they are personally liable. The declaration contains three counts — the first, for goods sold and delivered — the second, for money found due on an account stated, and the third, is a special count.
It is very full and lengthy, but alleges in substance, that the defendants pretending there was a company duly incorporated under the laws of West Virginia, by the name of the Lancaster Furnace and Mining Company, induced the plaintiff to sell certain goods to said company ; that the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Selma & Tennessee Rail Road v. TiptonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1843
- Williams v. Bank of MichiganCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1831
- Duke v. Cahawba Nav. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- Wilson v. MathewsNew York Supreme Court · 1857
3Cited by12 opinions
- National Bank v. Texas Investment Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1889
- Harrill v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909
- Cranson v. International Business MacHines Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
- First National Bank v. RockefellerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Inasmuch Gospel Mission, Inc. v. Mercantile Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1945
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.