Legal Opinion

Proctor Electric Co. v. Zink

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 20, 1958No. [No. 208, September Term, 1957.]PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPrescott, J.

Proctor Electric Company (Proctor), the plaintiff below, has appealed from a judgment for the appellees, Alan R. Zink, trading as Western Welding Company (Zink), and Gilbert Cummins & Company, Inc. (Cummins), for costs, entered by direction of the trial court at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case.

When reviewing the correctness of the direction of a verdict in favor of the defendants, we must resolve all conflicts in the evidence in favor of the plaintiff and assume the truth of all evidence and such inferences as may naturally and legitimately be deduced therefrom which tend to support…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Elwood v. . the Western Union Telegraph Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
  2. Potts v. Armour & Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1944
  3. Strasburger v. VogelCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1906
  4. Hickory Transfer Co. v. NezbedCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1953
  5. Maszczenski v. MyersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1957

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. General Motors Corp. v. LahockiCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1980
  2. Bruce v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
  3. Coffey v. Derby Steel Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1981
  4. Plitt v. GreenbergCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1966
  5. Nizer v. PhelpsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1969

36 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