Legal Opinion

Roebuck v. Steuart

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided August 3, 1988No. 1582, September Term, 1987PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

POLLITT, Judge.

This convoluted conglomeration of claims compels a certain circumlocution in its consideration. Our chore is complicated by counsel’s non-compliance with Rules 8-501(h) and (i) (formerly Rule 1028 a) concerning the Table of Contents and Format of the Record Extract. 1

Appellant and cross appellee, Janice L. Roebuck, and others, were sued in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County as guarantors of the debts of Express Liquors, Inc., a bankrupt corporation, by six liquor suppliers of that corporation. Alleging that any liability on her part to those creditors was caused by…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Atkins v. CroslandTexas Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Sard v. HardyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
  4. H & R BLOCK, INC. v. TestermanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
  5. General Motors Corp. v. LahockiCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1980

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. AlbrightCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013
  2. Schaefer v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
  3. Pulte Home Corp. v. Parex, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  4. Stanley v. TrinchardCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2007
  5. Pulte Home Corp. v. Parex, Inc.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2007

15 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