Cottman v. Villas

RODOWSKY, Judge. In this case we reaffirm that, on an appeal from the District Court of Maryland, the amount in controversy in an action for possession of leased premises is determined by the fair market rent for the period of possession involved in the controversy. Respondent, Princess Anne Villas (Princess Anne), is a federally subsidized housing project financed by the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA). Beginning October 1, 1987 Petitioner, Tyzanna Cottman (Cottman), entered into a series of yearly leases with Princess Anne.

During the October 1, 1992 to September 30, 1993 renewal Cottman was late paying her rent in seven of the months. Princess Anne gave timely notice that it would not renew the lease because of those delinquencies. In a second notice, threatening eviction if Cottman held over, Princess Anne set the fair market rent of the unit at $575 per month. Cottman held over, and Princess Anne, inter alia, filed a complaint in the District Court seeking possession for breach of the lease.

The District Court entered judgment for Cottman. She was then twenty-nine years old, and there is no evidence that she was not in good health. Her monthly federal subsidy of $188 and monthly rental payment of $167 totaled $355 per month (the aggregate rent). Princess Anne appealed to the circuit court, but did not request a transcript.

Thereafter Cottman moved in the circuit court to strike the appeal for failure to transmit the record within sixty days of filing the appeal. Maryland Rule 7-108. She argued that the appeal should be heard on the record ²⁹⁸ because the value of her property interest in her tenancy exceeded $2,500. The circuit court denied the motion, reasoning that the amount in controversy was $167, i.e., one month’s rent that Cottman, herself, paid.

After the circuit court entered judgment against Cottman ordering restitution of the premises with costs and payment of escrowed rent to Princess Anne, Cottman petitioned this Court for certiorari. We granted the writ. Appeals in civil actions from the District Court are heard on the record where the amount in controversy exceeds $2,500, exclusive of interest, costs, and attorney’s fees. Md. Code (1974, 1995 Repl.Vol.), § 12-401(f) of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article.

A required component of the record is a transcript of the District Court proceeding. Md. Rule 7-109. Here, if the amount in controversy exceeded $2,500, it was Princess Anne’s responsibility to order a transcript within ten days of noting the appeal, and the circuit court should have dismissed the appeal for failure to transmit the record. Md.Rules 7-113 and 7-114.

In its District Court claim for breach of lease, Princess Anne limited its requested relief to possession of the unit. Under those circumstances, Purvis v. Forrest Street Apartments, 286 Md. 398 , 408 A.2d 388 (1979), makes the value of the tenant’s right to possession determinative of the “amount in controversy.”