Hartman v. Caddington
258 A.2d 740, 255 Md. 651, 1969 Md. LEXIS 744
Court of Appeals of Maryland·Decided November 20, 1969·No. [No. 106, September Term, 1969.]·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
The appeal must be dismissed because there was no final judgment below from which an appeal could be taken. After a jury verdict, appellants filed a motion for judgment n.o.v. or in the alternative a new trial and the trial court granted a new trial.
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hartman v. Caddington, 258 A.2d 740, 255 Md. 651, 1969 Md. LEXIS 744 (Md. 1969).
258 A.2d 740 (Hartman v. Caddington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Albert W. Sisk & Son, Inc. v. Friendship Packers, Inc.
604 A.2d 69 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1992)
Archie's Steak House, Inc. v. Joe Rosenthal & Sons, Inc.
270 N.W.2d 591 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1978)