Maryland case law › Lansburgh v. Donaldson

Lansburgh v. Donaldson

108 Md. 689 (1908) · Court of Appeals of Maryland
Court of Appeals of MarylandDisposition: ReversedBurke, J.✓ Good law
HoldingThe complainant owned a farm in Prince George's County and in 1892 leased it to the defendant, George T.

Burke, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, sustaining a demurrer to the bill of complaint and dismissing the bill. The bill, among other things, alleges the following facts, which are admitted by the demurrer to be true, and which, for the purposes of this appeal, are all the facts that need be stated. The complainant was the owner in fee of a farm situated in Prince George’s County, and in the year 1892 he leased this farm to George T. Donaldson, the appellee, who agreed to pay an annual rental of one hundred dollars; the appellee entered in possession of the premises, and from time to time paid rent.

The relation of landlord and tenant existed for a number of years and during that time the tenant removed from the premises valuable mineral under-contract with the landlord, but has 690 never accounted to him therefor, and he also became further indebted to the complainant on other accounts which he has . failed to discharge. Donaldson failed to pay his rent promptly, and because of his failure in this respect, the complainant was not able to pay the taxes due upon the property, and the farm was sold by public authority to enforce their collection. Donaldson, who was then in possession of the property as the tenant of the complainant, purchased the premises at the tax •sale. It is alleged that he fraudulently acquired the tax title to the premises and that while the relation of landlord and tenant existed he fraudulently and without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff applied moneys for the payments of said taxes on the premises at a time and period when he was indebted to the complainant for rent and for other moneys due under various other agreements arising and existing during the period of his tenancy The plaintiff has made various efforts to reimburse Donaldson for moneys expended by him for . taxes, and has offered and has been ready and willing to pay him any and all taxes which he may have paid for State and County purposes on account of the rented premises, but has been unable to effect a satisfactory settlement with him.

The complainant tenders himself ready to account to the defendant for all taxes paid by him; provided the defendant account and pay for the use and occupation of the premises. The prayer for relief is; (a) That the defendant may bé decreed to hold the tax title to the land and premises described in the bill in trust for the complainant, (b) That an accounting may be had between the parties .whereby the defendant may be charged with the use and occupation of the premises from the time he entered into possession thereof as tenant, and that he be credited with whatever sums of money he may have paid for State and County Taxes on account of the land, and for other and general relief. The grounds assigned for the demurrer are; (i) That the plaintiff has not stated such a case as entitled him to and relief. (2) That the plaintiff has adequate relief in a Court of Law.

The Court, in its opinion, found that the plaintiff was out of 691 possession, and treated the proceeding as one to annul the tax deed under which the defendant has acquired a good prima facie title to the property, and dismissed the bill for the reason that the plaintiff had “a full and adequate remedy at law by an action of ejectment in which proceeding all disputed-questions raised by the bill can be fully adjusted.” It is provided by section 69 Article 81 of the Code of 1904 that; “The tenant or person holding a leasehold estate shall pay to the collector the taxes levied upon the demise dpremises, and shall have his action against the landlord for the sums so paid, and may deduct the same out

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