Routzahn v. Cromer

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• A contract signed by the husband, and intended to include his wife, did not include his wife as “the relationship of principal and agent between a husband and wife may not be implied solely from the marital status of the parties”
• A contract signed by the husband, and intended to include his wife, did not include his wife as \the relationship of principal and agent between a husband and wife may not be implied solely from the marital status of the parties\
• \an offer made to one person cannot be accepted by another\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. One 1984 Toyota Truck
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1987-11-23· cited 24×
• Arbesman v. Winer
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1983-12-29· cited 21×
• Sisson v. Sisson
  Nevada Supreme Court· 1961-12-13· cited 19×
• In Re Nicole B.
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2009-07-28· cited 12×
• Kimball v. Shell Oil Co.
  D. Maryland· 1959-08-03

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Columbian Carbon Co. v. Kight
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1955-05-13· cited 40×
• Lissau v. Smith
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1958-02-19· cited 34×
• Bukowitz v. Maryland Lumber Co.
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1956-07-11· cited 19×
• William Penn Supply Corp. v. Watterson
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 1958-11-24· cited 16×