Case ID: md_219/html/0506-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CONNOR v. BAYNE, et al.
    
    [No. 181,
    September Term, 1958.]
    
      Decided April 15, 1959.
    
    
      Motion for rehearing filed May 13, 1959, denied May 14, 1959.
    
    
      The cause was argued before Bruñe, C. J., and Henderson, Hammond and Prescott, JJ.
    
      Johnson Bowie, with whom was Maurice W. Baldwin on the brief, for appellant.
    
      Phillips L. Goldsborough, III, with whom were Clater W. Smith, Jr., and Clark, Smith & Prendergast on the brief, for appellees.
   PER Curiam.

The point here raised on motion for summary judgment as to whether Code (1957), Art. 93, Sec. 112, is a remedial or substantive statute of limitations, is the same as that raised on demurrer and decided in Chandlee v. Shockley, 219 Md. 493. We regard that case as controlling.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.