Carroll Brick Co. v. Gable

Baltimore City Circuit Court

Carroll Brick Co. v. Gable

1 Balt. C. Rep. 261

Baltimore City Circuit Court·Decided June 10, 1892·Published

Opinion

DENNIS, J.

In this case, I am of the opinion:

1st. That the plaintiffs are estopped from claiming a lien upon the reversion.

2d. That they are entitled to claim a lien upon the leasehold, because Stirling must be considered as agent of Gable, and they are not bound by the unrecorded declaration of trust in favor of Mrs. Gable.

I will sign a decree therefore for the sale of the leasehold interest, unless the amount of the lien claim is paid into Court by a day to be fixed by the decree.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DENNIS, J.

In this case, I am of the opinion:

1st. That the plaintiffs are estopped from claiming a lien upon the reversion.

2d. That they are entitled to claim a lien upon the leasehold, because Stirling must be considered as agent of Gable, and they are not bound by the unrecorded declaration of trust in favor of Mrs. Gable.

I will sign a decree therefore for the sale of the leasehold interest, unless the amount of the lien claim is paid into Court by a day to be fixed by the decree.

Carroll Brick Co. v. Gable, 1 Balt. C. Rep. 261 (Md. Super. Ct. 1892).

Pincite

1 Balt. C. Rep. 261 (Carroll Brick Co. v. Gable) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.