Eden St. Permanent Bldg. Asso. No. 1 v. Lusby

¹⁷⁴ Briscoe, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The question in this case, is a narrow one, and upon the record before us, is free from difficulty. The record presents a single question, and that is, the validity of a deed of assignment from one Arthur A. Schaeffer of Baltimore City to John Beck, dated * * * day of October, 1902, conveying a leasehold lot of ground, situate in Baltimore City, at the intersection of Castle and Gough streets, subject to an annual ground rent of $30.00, payable on the first day of January and July in each year. The property is described, as the same piece or parcel of ground described in the deed from John Beck to Arthur A. Schaeffer dated October 14th, 1902, and recorded the same day in one of the Land Becords of Baltimore City.

The deed was acknowledged on this * * * day of * * in the year 1902, before O. Chas. Friedel, a justice of the peace of the State of Maryland, in and for Baltimore City, but was not recorded until the 22nd of March, 1906. The property was subsequently, on the 8th day of June, 1906, mortgaged to the appellants, to secure a loan of $450 and upon default in the covenants and conditions of the mortgage, the property was under a decree of the Circuit Court of Baltimore City, dated the 27th day of July, 1910, sold at trustees’ sale, to the appellees for the sum of $1,025. The sale was duly reported to the Court for ratification, and on the 28th day of October, 1910, the appellees, as purchasers of the property, filed exceptions to the sale, upon the ground, that the trustee could not by reason of omission of dates and various other errors in the title deeds to the property, the long lapse of time between the dates of their execution and time of recording, execute and deliver a good and marketable title and estate to the property sold to them.

On the 16th day of February, 1911, the Circuit Court for Baltimore City sustained tüese exceptions, and held, that the sale should not be ratified, but did not, by its order, vacate or set aside the sale, as reported. ¹⁷⁵ It further appears, that on the same day that the mortgage was executed by the Schaeffers to the appellees, under which the sale was had, to wit, on the 8th day of June, 1900, this property was conveyed by deed by John Beck to Matilda Schaeffer, the wife of Arthur A. Schaeffer, and the deed appears to have been duly recorded on the same day among the Land Records of Baltimore City. The original conveyance from Beck to Schaeffer is dated the 14th day of October, 1902, was properly executed and recorded, in conformity to the statute, and this deed is specifically referred to in the alleged defective deed. It is objected, that the deed in dispute is defective for three reasons, first because the day in the month of October, 1902, when it was executed is omitted; second, because the certificate of acknowledgment contains the year, but omits both the d'ay and the month when the deed was acknowledged; and third, because the deed was not recorded until March 22nd, 1906, a matter of more than three years subsequent to the apparent date of its delivery. These objections, we think, in the view, we take of this case, are more technical than substantial, and even if they be defects, as insisted upon, they are such defects, as have been cured by the curative Acts of the Legislature of Maryland, passed since the execution and recording of the deed for the very purpose of correcting and curing errors in defectively executed and acknowledged papers and deeds.

Acts of 1908, Chapters 105 and 259; Acts of 1910,' Chapter 588. The disputed deed in this case is dated - day of October, 1902, and was recorded on the 22nd day of March, 1906, and we think, clearly falls within the remedial legislation and the provisions of the statutes above cited. These acts wore passed for the very purpose of correcting and curing such defects as here urged against this deed, and to confirm and make valid such deeds and other instruments, as indicated by the statute. ¹⁷⁶ By Chapter 588 of the Acts of 1910,' it is provided that “all deeds, mortgages, releases, bonds of conveyances, bills of sale, chattel mortgages and all other conveyances of real or personal property, or of any interest therein, which may have been executed, acknowledged or recorded in the State subsequent to the passage of the Act of the General Assembly of Maryland passed at its January Session, 1858, Chapter 208, which may not have been acknowledged according to the laws existing at the time of said acknowledgment, or which may not have been acknowledged before the proper officer, or when the certificate of acknowledgment is not in the prescribed form or when the official character of the officer taking the acknowledgment has not been certified to as required by law, or where