clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
The Maryland Code, Public General Laws, 1888
Volume 389, Page 1137   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

ART. 75.] PRACTICE—EXTENDING JUDGMENTS. 1137

writing obligatory, upon which the suit was brought, or upon
legal and satisfactory proof of the correctness and amount of the
claim where the suit was brought to recover a debt due upon
open account, shall assess the damages and order the judgment to
be extended for the amount so found to be due, and interest on the
same till paid, and costs of suit. In all other cases in which an
interlocutory judgment, or judgment by default has been, or shall
hereafter be entered, the judge of the court where such judgment
is, shall, on motion of the plaintiff, or his attorney, make an order
in the nature of a writ of inquiry, to charge the jury in atten-
dance in such court to inquire of the damages and costs sustained
by the plaintiff in such action, which said inquiry shall be made,
and the evidence given in open court, in the same manner, and
under the same regulations as in other jury trials; and after the
said jury, charged as aforesaid, shall have considered thereof,
they shall forthwith return their inquisition, under their hands
and seals, and the court shall order such judgment to be extended
in accordance with the terms of such finding of the jury.

Hams v.Jaffray, 3 H. & J 543 Wilmer v. Harris, 5 H v. J. 1. Kiersted
v. Rogers, 6 H. & J 288. Hopewell v. Price. 2 H. & G 275. Laidler v. State,
2 H & G. 277. Cushwa v. Cushwa. 9 Gill, 244. Green v. Hamilton, 16 Md.
329. Huston v. Ditto, 20 Md 306. Griffith v. Lynch, 21 Md. 575. Davidson
v. Myers, 24 Md. 538. Stansbury v. Hack, 29 Md. 361. Horner v. O'Laughlin,
29 Md. 465.

P. G. L, (1860,) art. 75, sec. 63. 1785, ch. 80, sec. 13.

87. In all cases of actions brought for the penalty of any bond,
bill, covenant or contract with penalty, the jury may, under the
direction of the court, upon the plea of payment, or performance
of the conditions or terms of the contract, ascertain and by their
verdict find what sum of money is really and justly due to the
plaintiff; and upon such finding, judgment shall be entered by
the court for the penalty, to be released upon payment of the
Bum of money so found to be due, and interest on the same till
paid, and costs of suit; and the sum really due as aforesaid, or in
any other manner ascertained, upon bonds and other instruments
of writing, with penalty, shall be considered in law as the true
debt, and shall be so pleaded by and allowed to administrators
and others.

State v. Wilson, 38 Md. 338. State v. Tabler, 41 Md 236. Orendorff v. Utz,
48 Md. 208.

72

 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
The Maryland Code, Public General Laws, 1888
Volume 389, Page 1137   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  August 16, 2024
Maryland State Archives