Frank v. Miller
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. This suit was brought by the appellees, surviving partners of the firm of Daniel Miller & Co., against the appellant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Superior Court of Baltimore City. This suit was brought by the appellees, surviving partners of the firm of Daniel Miller & Co., against the appellant. The plaintiffs, in addition to the money counts, declared as follows : 6. For that, whereas, on or about the 18th of February 1871, certain parties, trading at Selma, Alabama, as Katzehberg & Co., were justly and bona fide indebted to said plaintiffs on two promissory notes, for $191.37 each, dated on the 13th day of May, 1870, drawn in favor of Daniel Miller & Co., and payable six and nine months after date respectively, at…
1Opinion of the Court
Bartol, O.' J.,
delivered the opinion of the Court.
This suit was brought by the appellees upon an alleged agreement made by the appellant to pay a debt due them from Katzenberg & Co., of Selma, Alabama.
The instructions given to the jury, by the Superior Court, at the instance of the plaintiffs, in granting their *459two prayers, place their claim to recover on two alternative grounds.
First. — Considering the case within the 4th section of the Statute of Frauds, they maintain that the paper-writing signed by the defendant and sent by him to the plaintiffs, on the 18th day of February, 1871, is a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hartle v. StahlCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1867
- Moale v. BuchananCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1840
- Andre v. BodmanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1859
3Cited by10 opinions
- Markoff v. KreinerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1941
- Lazear v. National Union BankCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1880
- Caylor v. RoeIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Slingluff v. Andrew Volk Builders' Supply Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1899
- Heyman v. DooleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1893
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.