From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hartman v. Caddington

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Nov 20, 1969
258 A.2d 740 (Md. 1969)

Opinion

[No. 106, September Term, 1969.]

Decided November 20, 1969.

APPEAL — Final Judgment — Trial Court's Granting Of A New Trial Not A Final Judgment — Appeal Must Be Dismissed. p. 651

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County (PUGH, J.).

Suit by Mary A. Caddington against Herman G. Hartman and Juanita M. Childers for conversion of personal property and household furnishings owned by the plaintiff. After a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of $2,500.00 the trial court granted a new trial unless plaintiff agreed to accept $500.00 in lieu of verdict. The defendants appeal. Plaintiff would not accept the $500.00.

Appeal dismissed with costs.

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

Robert E. Bullard for appellants.

Frank W. Wilson for appellee.


The appeal must be dismissed because there was no final judgment below from which an appeal could be taken. After a jury verdict, appellants filed a motion for judgment n.o.v. or in the alternative a new trial and the trial court granted a new trial.

Appeal dismissed with costs.


Summaries of

Hartman v. Caddington

Court of Appeals of Maryland
Nov 20, 1969
258 A.2d 740 (Md. 1969)
Case details for

Hartman v. Caddington

Case Details

Full title:HARTMAN ET AL. v . CADDINGTON

Court:Court of Appeals of Maryland

Date published: Nov 20, 1969

Citations

258 A.2d 740 (Md. 1969)
258 A.2d 740

Citing Cases

Albert W. Sisk & Son, Inc. v. Friendship Packers, Inc.

See, e.g., Quartertime Video v. Hanna, supra, 321 Md. at 64-66, 580 A.2d at 1075-1076; Banegura v. Taylor,…

Archie's Steak House v. Joe Rosenthal Sons

See Anno. 57 A.L.R.2d 1198. In the absence of regulation the rule is that where a new trial is granted, a…