Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MILGRAY ELECTRONICS, INC. ET AL. v. VITRO ELECTRONICS, DIVISION OF VITRO CORPORATION OF AMERICA

APPEAL — Order Overruling Motion To Quash A Writ Of Summons — No Appeal Will Lie From Order Overruling Motion To Quash A Writ Of Summons As It Is Interlocutory Only And Not A Final Judgment. p. 383

PER CURIAM.

Milgray Electronics, Inc. of New York has made its second appearance before us in its attempts to resist jurisdiction under the Maryland "Long Arm" statute, Code (1957, 1965 Repl. Vol.) Art. 75, § 96. See Vitro Electronics v. Milgray, 255 Md. 498, 258 A.2d 749 (1969). This appeal is from an order denying Milgray's motion under Maryland Rule 323 to quash service of process and dismiss the action against it. On our own motion and in accordance with Rule 835 a 2 we have determined that its appeal must be dismissed. "It has long been established that no appeal will lie from an order overruling a motion to quash a writ of summons, [citations omitted] because it is interlocutory only, and not a final judgment." Hillyard Constr. Co. v. Lynch, 256 Md. 375, 379, 260 A.2d 316 (1970) and cases cited there: Tvardek v. Tvardek, 257 Md. 88, 92-93, 261 A.2d 762 (1970).

Appeal dismissed and case remanded for further proceedings. Costs to be paid by the appellants.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MILGRAY ELECTRONICS v. VITRO
(Jan 11, 1971)