Smith v. State
Decision Date | 14 May 1919 |
Docket Number | No. 29.,29. |
Citation | 107 A. 255 |
Parties | SMITH et al. v. STATE. |
Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court of Baltimore City; John J. Dobler, Judge. "To be officially reported."
Action by the State of Maryland against J. Maulsby Smith and George A. Fleming, trustees, and J. Maulsby Smith, executor of Ada B. V. Dickson, deceased. From decree for the State, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Argued before BOYD, C. J., and BRISCOE, BURKE, THOMAS, PATTISON, URNER, STOCKBRIDGE, and ADKINS, JJ.
Charles McH. Howard and John B. Deming, both of Baltimore (Whitelock, Deming & Kemp, Thomas A. Murray, and Randolph Barton, Jr., all of Baltimore, on the brief), for appellants.
Ogle Marbury, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Albert C. Ritchie, Atty. Gen., on the brief), for the State.
STOCKBRIDGE, J. Two questions are involved in this appeal, one of which is of considerable importance and in regard to which no direct authority exists among the previous decisions of this court. Decisions elsewhere, based upon the phraseology of statutes adopted in the several states, throw but little light upon the questions, dependent as they are upon the language of the statutes adopted in each state. The facts out of which this case arises may be stated as follows:
On the 18th of November, 1915, Mrs. Ada B. V. Dickson executed a deed of trust to J. Maulsby Smith and George A. Fleming, trustees, which deed declared trusts as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Salisbury Beauty Schools v. State Bd. of Cosmetologists
...106 of 150 Md., at page 436 of 132 A.: 'We are not unmindful of the limitation upon this rule as expressed in the case of Smith v. State, 134 Md. 473, (480), 107 A. 255, in which it was said: 'When the question is presented to it of a laxity in enforcement, or misconception of the intent of......
-
Darnall v. Connor
...one answering the description of seized and possessed of the property. Exactly that contention was made and rejected in Smith v. State, 134 Md. 473, 478, 107 A. 255. The words "seized and possessed" are, in modern law, used with such varied meanings that perhaps it might be questioned wheth......
-
Price v. State
... ... B. was, and now is, insane for lunatic)" etc. This is the only form given, but it is the model by which a verdict according to the facts may be framed in compliance with the provisions of the statute. So, in Hadaway v. Smith, 71 Md. 319, 18 A. 589, an examination of the record shows the special verdict mentioned in the decision to have been that the traverser at the time of the commission of the offense for which he is indicted was insane, and that he still is insane. And in Wagner v. Baltimore, 134 Md. 307, 106 A; ... ...
-
Pope v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 63.
... ... and delivered to such persons as the said grantor may designate in his last will and testament duly executed according to the laws of the State of Maryland, to take the same, but should the said grantor die intestate and/or without exercising the power of disposing by will as herein set ... 157, 168, 169, 110 A. 211; American Colonization Society's Case, 132 Md. 524, 532, 104 A. 120; Olivet v. Whitworth, 82 Md. 258, 33 A. 723; Smith v. State, 134 Md. 473, 107 A. 255 ... 2. The remaining question on this appeal relates to certain bonds, stocks, a mortgage, and a ... ...