APPEALS AND ERRORS. 235

Baldwin, 8 Gill, 357; Buchanan v. Torrance, 11 G. & J. 345; Chaney v. Tipton, 11
G. & J. 255; Evans v. Iglehart, 6 G. & J. 205; Owings v. Baldwin, 8 Gill, 357.

Cases remanded that an answer may be filed: Keyser v. Upshur, 92 Md. 740:
C. & P. Telephone Co. v. Baltimore, 89 Md. 717; Johnson v. Robertson, 34 Md. 175;
Tolson v. Tolson, 8 Gill, 390; Lyles v. Hatton, 6 G. & J. 136.

Cases remanded that the bill may be amended: Gittings v. Baltimore, 95 Md.
427; Commercial, etc., Assn. v. Robinson, 90 Md. 625; Judik v. Crane, 81 Md. 620;
Jeffrey v. Flood, 70 Md. 46; Bayne v. Edelen, 62 Md. 110; Keerl v. Keerl, 28 Md.
161; Thomas v. Doub, 1 Md. 328; Kent v. Taneyhill, 6 G. & J. 4.

Cases remanded that accounts may be stated: Trieber v. Lanahan, 23 Md. 136;
Reese v. Bank of Commerse, 14 Md. 284; Carr v. Hobbs, 11 Md. 296; Young v.
Reynolds, 4 Md. 384; Clagett v. Hall, 9 G. & J. 97.

Cases remanded that other parties may be made: Jarrell v. Felton, 86 Md: 692;
Foos v. Scarf, 55 Md. 313; Ridgeley v. Bond, 18 Md. 451; Marbury v. Stonestreet,
1 Md. 162; Iglehart v. Lee, 4 Md. Ch. 514; Clagett v. Hall, 9 G. & J. 97.

Cases remanded for miscellaneous purposes: Boeto Lodge v. Grand Lodge, 134
Md. 359 (for further proceedings); Welch v. Colgon, 126 Md. 15 (to amend petition);
In re Paca, 140 Md. 53 (to amend petition by adding prayer for process); Carlin v.
Harris, 100 Md. 56 (that further proceedings may be taken); Wilson v. Blount, 93
Md. 34 (that decree may be corrected); Cockey v. Plempel, 86 Md. 188 (that supple-
mentary bill may be dismissed and case heard upon original bill); Riley v. Carter,
76 Md. 613 (that decree may be passed between co-defendants); Girault v. Adams,
61 Md. 13 (that certain money may be paid or, in default, certain property
sold); Rust v. Chisolm, 57 Md. 384 (that a mechanic's lien claim may be amended);
Perkins v. Emory, 55 Md. 38 (that an error may be corrected and a claim enforced);
Stanhope v. Dodge, 52 Md. 494 (that claims may be proved and distribution made);
Light Street, etc., Co. v. Bannon, 47 Md. 145 (that bill may be amended, proof taken
and further proceedings had); Smith v. Shaffer, 46 Md. 579 (that proceedings may be
amended); Fulton v. Harman, 44 Md. 267 (that omissions in the record may be
supplied); Cole v. Cole, 41 Md. 305 (that the case may be disposed of in conformity
with the opinion of the appellate court); Thruston v. Minke, 32 Md. 577 (that
property may be decreed to be sold free of mortgages); Smith v. Townsend, 27 Md.
391 (that proof may be taken and an account stated); Mory v. Michael, 18 Md.
242 (that further proceedings may be had); Baltimore, etc., Dept. v. Creamer,
17 Md. 259 (that further proceedings may be had) ; Phelps v. Stewart, 17 Md. 240
(to have a new partition and assignment of dower); Glenn v. Cockey, 16 Md. 455
(to appoint a new trustee) ; Gayle v. Fattle, 14 Md. 86 (that further proceedings
may be had); Willett v. Carroll, 13 Md. 469 (that further proceedings may be had);
Greer v. Baughman, 13 Md. 278 (that a fund may be properly applied); Dugan v.
Hollins, 11 Md. 81 (that further proceedings may be had) ; Hutchins v. Dixon, 11
Md. 41 (that further proceedings may be had); Williams v. Banks, 11 Md. 251
(that further proceedings may be had according to the opinion); Robertson v.
American, etc., Assn., 10 Md. 408 (that the decree may be corrected and further
proceedings had ); Rider v. Grey, 10 Md. 301 (that a proper decree may be passed);
Lanahan v. Latrobe, 7 Md. 273 (that further proceedings may be had); Watson v.
Bane, 7 Md. 130 (that the decision of the appellate court may be made effective);
Bowie v. Stonestreet, 6 Md. 434 (that the decision of the appellate court may be
made effective); Wilson v. Farquharson, 5 Md. 140 (that an investment may be
made, and interest paid) ; White v. Flannigan, 1 Md. 551 (that further proceedings
may be had) ; Clagett v. Hall, 9 G. & J. 97 (that pleadings may be amended, other
parties made, further accounts stated and testimony taken); Young v. Lyons, 8
Gill, 170 (for further proceedings); Peters v. Van Lear, 4 Gill, 265 (that further
proceedings may be had).

Generally.

The case when remanded stands as though no appeal had been taken and no former
decree passed. The opinion of the court of appeals controls. Dennis v. Dennis, 15
Md. 149; Williams v. Banks, 19 Md. 35. And see Eyler v. Hoover, 8 Md. 1.

Under this section, the appellate court may without remanding the case, pass a
final and effective decree for the payment of money. On the other hand, the appel-
late court may remand the case with specific directions as to the decree to be passed
by the lower court. Winter v. Gittings, 102 Md. 467. And see Young v. Frost, 1
Md. 394.

Upon remanding the case, the court of appeals does not dispose of the matter of
costs, but leaves it to await the final determination of the case; no appeal from the
determination of a court of equity on the matter of costs. This section quoted and
applied. Smith v. Shaffer, 50 Md. 132.