Thomas v. Malster
This text of 14 Md. 382 (Thomas v. Malster) 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
delivered the opinion of this court.
In expressing our concurrence with the ruling of the court below, we do so on the single ground that the subject-matter, in a different form, was passed upon by the court on discharging the rule laid at the instance of the plaintiff on the defendants, to show cause why the judgment should not be made complete, and taken as a judgment, “nunc pro tunc” it being well settled that when a matter has been once decided by a court of competent jurisdiction, it is final as between the par[388]*388ties. We express no opinion on the correctness of that decision, for whether right or wrong, the parties are concluded, the remedy being by an appeal if the party conceived himself aggrieved. Beall vs. Brown's Adm'r, 12 Md. Rep., 550.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
14 Md. 382, 1859 Md. LEXIS 84, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-malster-md-1859.