Piersma v. Seitz
This text of 276 A.2d 666 (Piersma v. Seitz) 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.
Opinion
PIERSMA
v.
SEITZ BEALL
v.
DANIELS
Court of Appeals of Maryland.
The cause was argued before HAMMOND, C.J., and BARNES, McWILLIAMS, FINAN, SINGLEY, SMITH and DIGGES, JJ.
Martin H. Freeman, with whom were Sasscer, Clagett, Powers & Channing on the brief, for Priscilla R. *62 Piersma, appellant. Frank B. Haskell, III, with whom were Mitchell, Clagett & Haskell on the brief, for David R. Beall, other appellant.
Townes L. Dawson for William L. Seitz, appellee and submitted on brief by Russell W. Shipley and Kahler, Shipley & O'Malley for Judith G. Daniels, other appellee.
PER CURIAM:
This Court adopts the opinion of Chief Judge Murphy in Piersma v. Seitz, 10 Md. App. 439, and therefore affirms the judgments appealed from.
Judgments affirmed with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
276 A.2d 666, 262 Md. 61, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/piersma-v-seitz-md-1971.