Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

21 Md. 355

Sellers v. Zimmerman

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 11, 1864

Court of Appeals of Maryland · decided 1864-05-11

Rep., 255. The question now presented, which is stated in the opinion of this Court, was submitted to the Court without argument:' — Bowie, C. J., Bartol, G-oldsborough, and Cochran, J.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 2001

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1864-05-11

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Bartol, J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of this Court:

¶2This was an appeal from a, judgment at law: this Court reversed the judgment of the Circuit Court, and sent hack the case on procedendo. We are now called on to decide whether upon the judgment of reversal in the Court of Appeals, the party in whose favor such judgment was rendered is entitled to recover the Costs in both Courts. In the decision pronounced in the case of Doub vs. Mason & Wife, 5 Md. Rep., 612, Appendix, it was, said: “In all appeals from judgments at law, the. reversal or affirmance thereof always carries the costs in both Courts.” The 41st sec. of Article 29, of the Code, according to our construction of its language, makes the same provision. We are therefore of opinion, that upon the judgment of reversal in this case, the appellant is entitled to recover his costs incurred both in the Circuit Court and in the Court of Appeals, and to have execution therefor.

¶3Judgment reversed.

/21/md/355 · .json · Public domain