Legal Opinion

Maulsby v. Scarborough

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 17, 1940No. [No. 34, October Term, 1940.]PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSloan, J.

One of the appellees, Curtis Kroh, filed a bill of inter-pleader against Miller Scarborough and J. Harvey Scarborough, and Florence Young Maulsby, Elizabeth C. Smithers and Margaret Smithers, to which the Scar-boroughs answered and the others demurred. Scott v. Maréen, 153 Md. 14, 137 A. 523. The demurrer was overruled and the demurrants ordered to answer without prejudice to raise the same questions in their answer as in their demurrer. They answered and demurred, repeating the reasons assigned in the original demurrer. The plaintiff, Kroh, demurred to the answer of the appellants, and his…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Ketcham v. Brazil Block Coal Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Lamson v. ClarksonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
  3. Hopkins v. Easton National BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1936
  4. Johnson v. RiddleSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  5. Presstman v. SilljacksCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1879

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Smith v. ShiebeckCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1942
  2. Central Montana Stockyards v. FraserMontana Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Hancock Oil Co. v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Miller v. Massachusetts Mutual Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1944
  5. Rockwell v. Carroll Printing & Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1948

5 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