Legal Opinion

Smith v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 16, 1935No. [No. 76, October Term, 1934.]PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParke, J.

The record at bar is intended to have reviewed the ruling that the amended declaration of the plaintiff fails to state a cause' of action. Each of the' defendants raised this question by separate demurrers, which were sever ally sustained, with leave to the plaintiff to amend within ten days. The privilege was not exercised, and no judgment was entered on the demurrer, but the plaintiff appealed. A ruling on a demurrer to a declaration is not a final judgment from which an appeal lies; and the appeal must be dismissed. Miller v. West, 165 Md, 245, 249, 167 A. 696; Emersonian Apartments v.…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Mayor of Cumberland v. WillisonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1878
  2. Walters v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1913
  3. Taylor v. Mayor of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1917
  4. Krebs v. State Roads CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1931
  5. DeLauder v. County CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1901

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Widgeon v. Eastern Shore Hospital CenterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1984
  2. Beach v. North Chesapeake Beach Land & Improvement Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1937
  3. Mayor of Baltimore v. HimmelfarbCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1937
  4. Central Collection v. Columbia MedicalCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1984
  5. Dermer v. FaunceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1947

4 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