Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1966–1995 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Maryland courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Bertonazzi v. Hillman, Adm'xgreen2 sentences1995This Court has recognized that “[t]he six-month statute of limitations in suits against executors or administrators has the ... purpose of requiring claimants seeking damages resulting from the negligence of the decedent to make claim by suit within six months so that the personal representative of the decedent can make the prompt settlement of the estate contemplated by the law....” Bertonazzi v. Hillman, 241 Md. 361, 367 , 216 A.2d 723, 726 (1966). 1995This Court has recognized that “[t]he six-month statute of limitations in suits against executors or administrators has the ... purpose of requiring claimants seeking damages resulting from the negligence of the decedent to make claim by suit within six months so that the personal representative of the decedent can make the prompt settlement of the estate contemplated by the law....” Bertonazzi v. Hillman, 241 Md. 361, 367 , 216 A.2d 723, 726 (1966). | 1 | 5 |
Burket v. Aldridge, Adm'rgreen2 sentences1967In Burket v. Aldridge, Adm’r, 241 Md. 423, 426 , 216 A. 2d 910 , Judge Oppenheimer, for this Court, said after quoting the pertinent provisions of Article 93, Section 112: “The language of Section 112 is unambiguous,” and after going on to say that suit must be brought against the personal representative of the tort-feasor within six months of his qualification, quoted from Bertonazzi v. Hillman, 241 Md. 361 , 216 A. 2d 723 , as follows: “The six-month statute of limitations in suits against executors or administrators has the added purpose of requiring claimants seeking damages resulting from 1967In Burket v. Aldridge, Adm’r, 241 Md. 423, 426 , 216 A. 2d 910 , Judge Oppenheimer, for this Court, said after quoting the pertinent provisions of Article 93, Section 112: “The language of Section 112 is unambiguous,” and after going on to say that suit must be brought against the personal representative of the tort-feasor within six months of his qualification, quoted from Bertonazzi v. Hillman, 241 Md. 361 , 216 A. 2d 723 , as follows: “The six-month statute of limitations in suits against executors or administrators has the added purpose of requiring claimants seeking damages resulting from | 1 | 2 |
Yingling v. Smithgreen2 sentences1995See also Yingling v. Smith, 259 Md. 260, 265 , 269 A.2d 612, 614 (1970); MacBride v. Gulbro, 247 Md. 727, 730 , 234 A.2d 586, 588 (1967); Burket v. Aldridge, supra 241 Md. at 428-429, 216 A.2d at 912 . 1995See also Yingling v. Smith, 259 Md. 260, 265 , 269 A.2d 612, 614 (1970); MacBride v. Gulbro, 247 Md. 727, 730 , 234 A.2d 586, 588 (1967); Burket v. Aldridge, supra 241 Md. at 428-429, 216 A.2d at 912 . | 1 | 1 |
MacBride v. GULBRO, ADM'X OF ESTATE OF DOTSONgreen2 sentences1995See also Yingling v. Smith, 259 Md. 260, 265 , 269 A.2d 612, 614 (1970); MacBride v. Gulbro, 247 Md. 727, 730 , 234 A.2d 586, 588 (1967); Burket v. Aldridge, supra 241 Md. at 428-429, 216 A.2d at 912 . 1995See also Yingling v. Smith, 259 Md. 260, 265 , 269 A.2d 612, 614 (1970); MacBride v. Gulbro, 247 Md. 727, 730 , 234 A.2d 586, 588 (1967); Burket v. Aldridge, supra 241 Md. at 428-429, 216 A.2d at 912 . | 1 | 1 |
Ruff's Adm'r. v. Bullgreen1 sentence1966The theory is that even if one has a just claim it is unjust not to put the adversary on notice to defend within the period of limitation and that the right to be free of stale claims in time comes to prevail over the right to prosecute them.” In Bertonazzi v. Hillman, 241 Md. 361 , 216 A. 2d 723 (1966), Judge Hammond, for the Court, said as to the six months period of limitation under Section 112: “The six-month statute of limitations in suits against executors or administrators has the added purpose of requiring claimants seeking damages resulting from *429 the negligence of a decedent to ma | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Chandlee v. Shockley
green
2 sentences1982Chandlee v. Shockley, 219 Md. 493, 502 . [ 241 Md. at 367 ]. 1966Chandlee v. Shockley, 219 Md. 493, 502 . | 2 | 1966–1982 |
State, Ex Rel. Dunnigan v. Cobourn
green
2 sentences1967In deciding the case of Dunnigan v. Cobourn, 171 Md. 23, 27 , 187 Atl. 881 , this Court had occasion to consider Code (1924), Article 67, Section 1, as amended by Chapter 570 of the Acts of 1929, Section 3, in connection with a suit for wrongful death. 1967In deciding the case of Dunnigan v. Cobourn, 171 Md. 23, 27 , 187 Atl. 881 , this Court had occasion to consider Code (1924), Article 67, Section 1, as amended by Chapter 570 of the Acts of 1929, Section 3, in connection with a suit for wrongful death. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Bauserman v. Blunt
green
1 sentence1966The theory is that even if one has a just claim it is unjust not to put the adversary on notice to defend within the period of limitation and that the right to be free of stale claims in time comes to prevail over the right to prosecute them.” In Bertonazzi v. Hillman, 241 Md. 361 , 216 A. 2d 723 (1966), Judge Hammond, for the Court, said as to the six months period of limitation under Section 112: “The six-month statute of limitations in suits against executors or administrators has the added purpose of requiring claimants seeking damages resulting from *429 the negligence of a decedent to ma | 1 | 1966–1966 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.