1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Md.
  4. 254 Md.
  5. 254 Md. 88 (1969)
 

MATTINGLY v. HOPKINS

[No. 148, September Term, 1968.]

254 Md. 88 (1969)

253 A.2d 904

MATTINGLY, ET UX. v. HOPKINS, ET AL.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Motion for rehearing filed June 13, 1969.

Denied June 23, 1969.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joseph A. Mattingly for appellants.

Leo Bender and H. Hughes Spragins, with whom were Tomes, Spragins & McDonald on the brief, for appellees.

The cause was argued before HAMMOND, C.J., and BARNES, FINAN, SINGLEY and SMITH, JJ.

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

The Circuit Court for Montgomery County dismissed the appellants' declaration, sounding in tort, as it was of the opinion that the three year statutory period of limitations had run prior to the filing of the suit. We are of the same mind.

In 1951, Joseph A. Mattingly and Marion Mattingly, his wife (appellants), purchased lots 8, 9, 10, and 11 of block 2 in a subdivision known as Hillmeade-Bradley Hills in Montgomery...

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