Legal Opinion

Kaliopulus v. Lumm

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 5, 1928No. [No. 39, January Term, 1928.]PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pabke, J.,

delivered, the opinion of the Court.

James Kaliopulus, the appellant, conducted an eating-house in Hagerstown, Maryland, when, on May 13th, 1921, he sold the business, with all its fixtures and equipment, and assigned his unexpired term in the building where the restaurant was carried on, to Charles E. Lumm and Ida K. Lumm, his wife, the appellees, for thirty thousand dollars. The eating-house was located on the premises known as Ho. 76 Washington Street, and was called the “Maryland Dining Hoorn.” The- buyers engaged to pay one thousand dollars on the making of the contract,…

2Cases cited41 opinions

  1. Menendez v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. United States v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  3. Galway v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
  4. Demuth v. Old Town BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1897
  5. Guerand v. DandeletCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1870

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Lipsitz v. ParrCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1933
  2. Marshall v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1933
  3. Dave & Buster's, Inc. v. White Flint Mall, LLLPCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2015
  4. Schaeffer v. Anne Arundel CountyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
  5. Tolman Laundry, Inc. v. WalkerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1936

20 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