Legal Opinion · Dissent

Chandlee v. Shockley

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided April 15, 1959No. [No. 163, September Term, 1958.]Published

1Dissent

Henderson, J.,

filed the following dissenting opinion.

I agree with the holding of the majority of the Court that Code (1957), Art. 93, sec. 112, creates a new cause of action, and that the time limitation therein is a condition precedent to the right to maintain the action. It follows that the lateness of the action may be invoked by demurrer. The distinction between causes of action created by the Legislature, with conditions attached, which limit the substantive right, and other causes of action existing at common law, as to which the Legislature undertakes to bar the remedy only, is well…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Claim of Ahern v. South Buffalo Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1952
  2. Scarborough v. Atlantic Coast Line R. CoCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1949
  3. Gideon J. Rohner, Jr. v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, a Utah CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1955
  4. McMahan v. Dorchester Fertilizer Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1944
  5. McCormick v. St. Francis De Sales ChurchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959

16 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