Legal Opinion

Clayton v. Shoemaker

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 22, 1887PublishedCited by 24 opinions

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Baltimore City. The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

1Opinion of the CourtYellott, J.

The appellees are administrators c. t. a., of the estate ■of Samuel M. Shoemaker, and, in their representative capacity, have possession of the property known as Guy’s Hotel, in the City of Baltimore. The testator held this property under a lease for ninety-nine years renewable forever. It appears that when the hotel was erected, a space of 2 feet and 9f- inches in breadth, located on the western extremity of the lot, was not included within the *218building ; it forming part of an alley, about six feet wide, extending from Court House Lane to the back yard of a restaurant on Fayette street. This…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Amelung v. SeekampCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1838
  2. Lanahan v. GahanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1872

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Freer v. DavisWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Smith v. ShiebeckCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1942
  3. Moore v. McAllisterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
  4. Bishop v. BaisleyOregon Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Oberheim v. ReesideCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1911

19 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