Baltimore Trust Co. v. Oidick
Baltimore City Superior Court
1Opinion of the CourtFrank, J.
The verdict of the jury was for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,600.25. The substantial ground for the defendant’s motion for a new trial is the suggested error in the rulings of the Court in excluding testimony tendered by the defendant as hereinafter stated. The action was upon a promissory note of the defendant to the order of Bernstein, Cohen & Co., which was the trade-name of Max Cohen, a private banker, and by that banker endorsed in blank and delivered to the plaintiff with other similarly endorsed notes as collateral security for a loan from the plaintiff to Bernstein, Cohen & Co. By…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Black v. Bank of WestminsterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1903
- Edelen v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1921
- Moyses v. BellWashington Supreme Court · 1911
- Commercial Security Co. v. JackNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
- Glendo State Bank v. AbbottWyoming Supreme Court · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.