Northern Central Railway Co. v. Mills
Court of Appeals of Maryland
4th. That in determining as to the motion in arrest, the Court was. confined strictly to the record proper of the case itself, and could take no notice of the docket entries or instructions to the jury-contained in the diminution record. This case distinguished from that of Stirling, et ad. vs. Gm'Htee, 18 Md.,. 468. Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.
Read the full summary
4th. That in determining as to the motion in arrest, the Court was. confined strictly to the record proper of the case itself, and could take no notice of the docket entries or instructions to the jury-contained in the diminution record. This case distinguished from that of Stirling, et ad. vs. Gm'Htee, 18 Md.,. 468. Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. The case is stated in the opinion of the Court. The-record first sent to the Court of Appeals, contained only the pleadings, and the verdict, the motion in arrest,, and the action of the Court thereon; the entry of judgment, and…
1Opinion of the CourtMiller, J.
This appeal brings up.for review the action of the Superior Court in overruling a motion in arrest of judgment. *357The ground of the motion is, that in the action hy husband and wife for personal injuries suffered by the latter, and for which both must join in the suit, the declaration includes also a cause of action for which the husband should sue alone. In determining such a question this Court is, of course, confined strictly to the record proper of the case itself, and we can therefore take no notice, of any of the extrinsic matters contained in the diminution record. Gover vs. Turner, 28…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Baltimore City Passenger Railway Co. v. KempCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1883
- Fuller v. Naugatuck RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1852
- Stirling v. GarriteeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1862
- Merrick v. Trustees of the BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1849
- Barnes v. HurdMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Gore v. CondonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1898
- Hartsock v. MortCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1892
- Tribble v. Yakima Valley Transportation Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1918
- Hemming v. ElliottCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1886
- Catholic Benevolent Legion v. MonohanBaltimore City Circuit Court · 1897