Legal Opinion

Pantazes v. State

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided October 30, 2003No. 2731, Sept. Term, 2002PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOYLAN, Judge.

If we were to “buy into” the perspective of the appellant/bail bondsman, to wit, that he is simply an ordinary plaintiff (or ordinary defendant) involved in a legal “tussle” with the State over the entitlement to $10,000, his contentions might well have at least a surface plausibility. The very fact of bringing this appeal, however, betrays his fundamental failure to understand just how peripheral his role, as a bondsman, is and how almost coincidéntal his interests are in what is, at a more elemental level, quintessentially a struggle between the State and an absconding…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Frasher v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1970
  2. Tyler v. Capitol Indemnity InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1955
  3. Irwin v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1973
  4. Allegheny Mutual Casualty Co. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
  5. State v. OhayonOhio Court of Appeals · 1983

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Professional Bail Bonds, Inc. v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2009
  2. Big Louie Bail Bonds, LLC v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API