Legal Opinion
Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund Board v. Holland
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided February 4, 1966No. [No. 79, September Term, 1965.]PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMcWilliams, J.
We are asked, for the first time, to interpret the 1960 amendment (1960, ch. 49, § 1) to Code Art. 66)4, § 154 (a) (1957 Cum. Supp. 1965). The Unsatisfied Claim and Judgment Board (the Board) exhorts us to set aside the interpretation of the trial court. The facts, the question presented and the rationale of the decision are all set forth in the trial court’s opinion, which follows:
“The above matter was presented to the court on the following stipulation:
“1. The accident upon which the plaintiff’s claim is based occurred on September 4,1960.
“2. The Notice of Intention to Make Claim (form…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Wormack v. HowardSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
- Maddy v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1962
- Giacobbe v. GassertSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1959
- Mundey v. Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund BoardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
- Uline v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1961
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
- Seabaugh v. SiskMissouri Court of Appeals · 1967
- Wheeler v. Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment FundCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1970
- Grady v. Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund BoardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1970
- Mt. Beacon Insurance Company v. WilliamsDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1969
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.