Garitee v. Carter

Bartol, J., delivered the opinion of this court. In the opinion of this court, the motion to dismiss this appeal ought not to prevail. The question has been settled by the case of The State, use of Hickley, vs. Stewart & Gross, 12 G. & J., 456 , where an appeal from the judgment of the county court setting aside an award, was sustained. ¡ We think the court below erred in sustaining the objec ³¹² lions to the award and setting it aside. It is shown by the return to the writ of diminution, that the reference in this case was made under a rule of court.

The only exceptions to the award, presented for our consideration, are: 1st, because the arbitrators did not decide therein, on all, or any part, of the matters submitted to them, and decided on matters not within the submission. 2nd. Because said award is not certain to a common intent and final. The rule by which this court is governed, in dealing with awards, has been often announced. It has been more than once said, with approbation: “That a more liberal, and reasonable interpretation of awards is now adopted by the courts than formerly existed.

Every reasonable intendment will be made in their favor, and a construction given to them that will support them if possible, without violating the rules adopted for the construction of written instruments.” 10 G. & J., 193 . 5 Md. Rep., 359 . 8 Md. Rep., 225 . Applying this rule to the present case, we are unable to perceive any ground for the second exception taken to this award. It has all the certainty which the law requires, and is a final determination of the cause referred to the arbitrators. With reference to the first exception, we are clearly of opinion that so far as the