Elkton Supply Co. v. Stubbiles

23 A.2d 3, 180 Md. 97, 1941 Md. LEXIS 197
CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
DecidedDecember 4, 1941
Docket[No. 69, October Term, 1941.]
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 23 A.2d 3 (Elkton Supply Co. v. Stubbiles) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Elkton Supply Co. v. Stubbiles, 23 A.2d 3, 180 Md. 97, 1941 Md. LEXIS 197 (Md. 1941).

Opinion

Forsythe, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Freida W. Stubbiles and William W. Stubbiles, her husband, filed a suit in ejectment in the Circuit Court for Cecil County, against the Elkton Supply Company, a corporation. The case came on for trial, and the court, sitting without jury, rendered a verdict for the defendant, The Elkton Supply Company.

The exact form of the verdict, as it appears in the record, in this appeal is, “Verdict of the Court is for the Defendant. Costs to be equally divided between the Plaintiffs and Defendant.”

The appellant, defendant below, appealed “from the judgment of the Court directing it to pay one-half of the costs.”

*99 The record contains nothing but the docket entries, and certificates of the clerk of the court, that the docket entries are true copies.

From the record, the question at once arises, whether the appeal can be entertained. It has long been the well-settled rule that an appeal cannot be taken from a verdict only, but must be from a final judgment, duly entered by the court- Until a final judgment has been entered this court has no jurisdiction to hear the case on appeal. Smith v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 168 Md. 89, 91, 176 A. 642; Miller v. West, 165 Md. 245, 167 A. 696; Newbold v. Green, 122 Md. 648, 90 A. 513; Cunningham v. Board of School Com’rs of Carroll County, 93 Md. 738, 48 A. 1046; Hayman v. Lambden, 97 Md. 33, 54 A. 962; Smithson v. United States Telegraph Co., 29 Md. 162; 2 Am. Jur. p. 868, sec. 30 and note 6.

In conformity to that rule the appeal in this case must be dismissed.

The appellant appealed only from the imposition upon it of one-half of the costs. Under the circumstances, it may be proper for us to re-state the fixed rule, in reference to the payment of costs in cases tried in courts of law- It is, that the costs invariably follow the verdict. Repp v. Berger, 60 Md. 1, 14 Am. Jur. p. 9, sec. 10, and notes 4 and 5.

In the case the appellant was entirely successful, and could not be required to pay any part of the costs.

Appeal dismissed, appellant to pay the costs of this appeal.

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

Related

Chavis v. Blibaum & Assoc. Moore v. Peak Mgmt.
264 A.3d 1254 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2021)
Goodman v. Clark
69 A.2d 496 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1949)
Bonner v. Celanese Corp. of America
66 A.2d 400 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1949)
Big Vein Coal Co. v. Leasure
64 A.2d 563 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1949)
Katz v. Katz
52 A.2d 925 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1947)
Dermer v. Faunce
51 A.2d 76 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1947)
Snyder v. Cearfoss
46 A.2d 607 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1946)
Penny v. Department of Maryland State Police
45 A.2d 741 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1946)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
23 A.2d 3, 180 Md. 97, 1941 Md. LEXIS 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elkton-supply-co-v-stubbiles-md-1941.