STANKOVICH v. LEHMAN

[No. 119, September Term, 1962.]

230 Md. 426 (1963)

187 A.2d 309

STANKOVICH ET UX. v. LEHMAN ET UX.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Decided January 18, 1963.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Wilson K. Barnes, with whom were Anderson, Barnes, Coe & King on the brief, for the appellants.

Risque W. Plummer, with whom were Paul R. Kach and Griffin & Plummer on the brief, for the appellees.

The cause was argued before BRUNE, C.J., and HAMMOND, PRESCOTT, MARBURY and SYBERT, JJ.


HAMMOND, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

The trial judge refused to strike out a judgment by confession entered against the appellants upon a warrant of attorney contained in a promissory note which they had signed as makers. They asserted below and assert here that the appellees, the endorsees of the note, who obtained the judgment were (because the note was not negotiable and the appellees were not holders in due course) no more than assignees, subject to...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases