142 Md.
Volume 142 — Maryland Reports
76 opinions
- 142 Md. 1Hughes v. McDougall (1922)
- 142 Md. 7Abbott v. Hibbitts (1922)
- 142 Md. 18Rosenthal v. Durkin (1922)
- 142 Md. 27State v. Brown (1922)
- 142 Md. 31Stratmann v. Haile (1922)
- 142 Md. 38Raith v. Cohen (1922)
- 142 Md. 52Outerbridge Horsey Co. v. Martin (1923)
- 142 Md. 57Bailey v. Poe (1923)
- 142 Md. 73Baltimore Dry Docks & Shipbuilding Co. v. Hoffman (1923)
- 142 Md. 79Mayor of Baltimore v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. (1923)
- 142 Md. 87Neubauer v. Overlea Realty Co. (1923)
- 142 Md. 101James v. Murray (1923)
- 142 Md. 118Karr, Hammond & Darnall v. Shirk (1923)
- 142 Md. 125Michael v. Rigler (1923)
- 142 Md. 140Carlin v. Krout (1923)
- 142 Md. 148Wandell Chocolate Co. v. Goldsmith (1923)
- 142 Md. 157Johnson v. Saulsbury (1923)
- 142 Md. 163Maryland Electric Railways Co. v. Lapp (1923)
- 142 Md. 172Ayers v. Ayers (1923)
- 142 Md. 184Goldstein v. Leitch (1923)
- 142 Md. 192Leitch v. the Druid Hill Lake Apartments Company (1923)
- 142 Md. 193Tidewater Portland Cement Co. v. Lincoln (1923)
- 142 Md. 205West v. Driscoll (1923)
- 142 Md. 211New Baltimore Loan & Savings Ass'n v. Tracey (1923)
- 142 Md. 222Lavine v. Abramson (1923)
- 142 Md. 230Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Walsh (1923)
- 142 Md. 246Hubbard Fertilizer Co. v. American Trona Corp. (1923)
- 142 Md. 251Pennsylvania Railroad v. Hoover (1923)
- 142 Md. 260Brown v. Scott (1923)
- 142 Md. 268Martin v. Staubs (1923)
- 142 Md. 274Western Maryland Railway Co. v. Shatzer (1923)
- 142 Md. 290Snyder v. Snyder (1923)
- 142 Md. 300Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Panitz (1923)
- 142 Md. 305Kinnier v. J. R. M. Adams, Inc. (1923)
- 142 Md. 310Edgar v. Imperial Ice Cream Co. (1923)
- 142 Md. 321Southern Hotel Co. v. Hamill (1923)
- 142 Md. 330Dashiell v. Jacoby (1923)
- 142 Md. 342Marx v. Reinecke (1923)
- 142 Md. 348Martin v. Long (1923)
- 142 Md. 352Derlin v. Derlin (1923)
- 142 Md. 365State Ex Rel. Carter v. Phillinger (1923)
- 142 Md. 380Mogul v. Gaither (1923)
- 142 Md. 390Reliance Life Insurance v. Bennington (1923)
- 142 Md. 398Lansman v. State (1923)
- 142 Md. 403Pollock v. Watts (1923)
- 142 Md. 408Dorman v. Gale (1923)
- 142 Md. 413Frock v. Columbian Construction Co. (1923)
- 142 Md. 422American Railway Express Co. v. Peninsula Produce Exchange (1923)
- 142 Md. 432Bonsal v. Karcz (1923)
- 142 Md. 441Doxen v. Wagner (1923)
- 142 Md. 454First National Bank v. Maryland Casualty Co. (1923)
- 142 Md. 464Gilpin v. State (1923)
- 142 Md. 472Lewis v. Commercial Casualty Insurance (1923)
- 142 Md. 484Mullan v. McKellip (1923)
- 142 Md. 500Wash., B. A.R. Co. v. Cross (1923)
- 142 Md. 500Washington, Baltimore & Annapolis Electric Railroad v. Cross (1923)
- 142 Md. 514Griffith v. Pullman Co. (1923)
- 142 Md. 522Whicher Development Corp. v. Ross (1923)
- 142 Md. 526Stevens v. Emergency Hospital (1923)
- 142 Md. 539Mullikin v. Hughlett (1923)
- 142 Md. 544Goldberg v. Erich (1923)
- 142 Md. 549Rodgers v. Rodgers (1923)
- 142 Md. 562Keystone Lime & Stone Co. v. Kabat (1923)
- 142 Md. 573Meredith v. Danzer (1923)
- 142 Md. 586Cover v. Taliaferro (1923)
- 142 Md. 601Ex Parte Nicholas (1923)
- 142 Md. 615Wilmer v. Baltimore Trust Co. (1923)
- 142 Md. 616Shanahan v. State Ex Rel. County Commissioners (1923)
- 142 Md. 638Gerlach v. Cumberland & Westernport Electric Railway Co. (1923)
- 142 Md. 644Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. Gunther (1923)
- 142 Md. 658Acme-Evans Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad (1923)Affirmed
<p>Action Against Carrier — Limitations—Period of Federal Control.</p> <p>The provision of the Transportation Act of 1920, section 206 (f), that the period of federal control shall not be computed as a part of the periods of limitation in actions against carriers for causes of action arising prior to federal control, applies only to statutory limitations, and has no application to the limitations contained in tariffs established by a carrier with the approval of the Interstate Commerce Commission, such limitations being contractual in their nature.</p>
- 142 Md. 673Noblesville Milling Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad (1923)Affirmed
<p>Action■ Against Carriers — -Limitations- Period of Federal Control.</p> <p>The provision oí the Transportation Act of 1920, section 206 (f), that the period of Federal control shall not be computed as a part of the periods of limitation in actions against carriers for causes of action arising prior to Federal control, does not apply to a limitation clause in tariffs filed by a carrier with the Interstate Commerce Commission, and contained in a hill of lading issued by the carrier.</p>
- 142 Md. 676Roberts v. Link (1923)
- 142 Md. 686Wetherall v. Hoffman (1923)
- 142 Md. 692Jirout v. Gebelein (1923)
- 142 Md. 701Allen v. Allen (1922)Reversed in part
Divorce — Cruelty of Treatment — Findings of Fact — Custody of Child. Appeal from the Circuit Court Xo. 2 of Baltimore City {Carrotj, T. Borov, J.). Bill by Varíe Violet Allen agaius-t Covington X. Allen for divorce. From a decree for defendant on his cross-bill, plaintiff appeals.