Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Alderson
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
We conclude that this appeal must be dismissed pursuant to the provisions of Md. Rule 605 a.1 because: (1) the issue of damages remains unresolved; (2) cross claims between the co-defendants, Greyhound Lines, Inc., and G. T. Koehler, remain formally undecided; and (3) an appeal cannot be taken from a verdict. As the issue of the prematureness of the appeal was not raised by any of the parties, we have no alternative but to act sua sponte.
The record indicates that multiple plaintiffs sued Greyhound Lines, Inc., which, in turn, impleaded Ronald C. Williamson and G. T. Koehler in a third party…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Peroti v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1970
- Blocher v. HarlowCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
- Merlands Club, Inc. v. MessallCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- Burns v. GoynesCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1972
- Flores v. KingCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1971
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. AldersonCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. Valley Mall AssociatesCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Hansen v. KaplanCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1980