Maryland case law › Taylor v. Sindall

Taylor v. Sindall

34 Md. 38 (1871) · Maryland Court of Appeals
Maryland Court of AppealsDisposition: ReversedBartol, C. J.✓ Good law
HoldingThis is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Common Pleas rendered June 28, 1870, striking out a prior judgment that had been entered in favor of the appellants against the appellee on March 15, 1865.

Bartol, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, rendered on the 28th day of June, 1870, striking out a judgment which had been rendered in the same Court in favor of the appellants against the appellee, on the 15th day of March, 1865. The motion to strike out the judgment was filed on the 31st day of May, 1870, and the cause assigned in support of the motion was alleged “ irregularities on the face of the proceedings.” The power to set aside judgments on motion for fraud, surprise or irregularity, is a common law power incident to Courts of record; and may be exercised after the term has passed in which the judgment was rendered. Kemp, et al. vs. Cook, et al., 18 Md., 138 .

The power was recognized by the Act of 1787, ch. 9, section 6, which has been reenacted in the Code, Article 75, section 38, which was construed by this Court in Butterfield vs. Levy, decided at October Term, 1868, and noted in, 30 Md., among the unreported cases. 41 (Decided 10th February, 1871.) The rules and principles governing the Court in deciding upon applications of this kind, made after the term has passed, are fully stated in the case of Kemp, et al. vs. Cook, et al. It is there said that relief will not be granted where a party has

This is a preview of Taylor v. Sindall. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.