Herzog v. Kronman

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Herzog v. Kronman

2 D.C. 146

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 1, 1935

DocketLaw No. 84910

StatusPublished

This text of 2 D.C. 146 (Herzog v. Kronman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Herzog v. Kronman, 2 D.C. 146 (D.C. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

PROCTOR, J.

Plaintiff’s attorneys state that the suit is for slander of title. The, demurrer in effect admits there were certain false statements concerning the claim, but nothing stated has reference to the title of any property of the estate or of plaintiff. Nothing was stated which directly or by innuendo disparages title to such property. For these and other reasons appearing, the demurrer to the second amended declaration will be sustained.

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

MEMORANDUM

PROCTOR, J.

Plaintiff’s attorneys state that the suit is for slander of title. The, demurrer in effect admits there were certain false statements concerning the claim, but nothing stated has reference to the title of any property of the estate or of plaintiff. Nothing was stated which directly or by innuendo disparages title to such property. For these and other reasons appearing, the demurrer to the second amended declaration will be sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 D.C. 146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/herzog-v-kronman-dc-1935.