1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Md.
  4. 221 Md.
  5. 221 Md. 369 (1960)
 

ROSE v. PAAPE

[No. 70, September Term, 1959.]

221 Md. 369 (1960)

157 A.2d 618

ROSE ET UX. v. PAAPE ET UX.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Decided February 2, 1960.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Richard W. Case, with whom were Thomas J. Curley, Roger D. Redden, and Smith, Somerville & Case on the brief, for appellants.

Ridgely P. Melvin, Jr., with whom were McWilliams & Melvin on the brief, for appellees.

The cause was argued before BRUNE, C.J., and HENDERSON, HAMMOND, PRESCOTT and HORNEY, JJ.

BRUNE, C.J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is an appeal by the respondents, Joseph E. Rose and wife, from two portions of a decree of the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County entered in a suit brought by Ronald C. Paape and wife, against the Roses and the Board of County Commissioners of Anne Arundel County (the Board) first, for a declaration that a rezoning ordinance of the Board dated April 15, 1958, was void, second for an injunction

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