Schaible v. Home Insurance

⁶⁸¹ Constable, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appeal in this, case is. from an order of the Court refusing to strike out- a judgment. The appellee brought suit in 1914 under the provisions of Chapter 385, of the Acts of 1912, now codified as section 77, of the Code of Local Laws of Baltimore County, and familiarly known as the Speedy Judgment Act, against the appellant and two others for the recovery of a certain amount growing out of a contract of insurance. The said Act provides that :“In any suit when thei cause of action is a contract * * * the plaintiff * * * shall he entitled to judgment to he entered by the Court, or the clerk thereof on motion, in writing, at any time after fifteen days from the return day, to which the defendant shall have been summoned, although the defendant may have pleaded, unless such plea, contains a good defense, and unless- the defendant or someone on his behalf shall, under oath or affirmation, state that every plea so pleaded by the defendant is true, etc.” The declaration was filed in the Circuit Court for Baltimore Couuty on.

February 2nd, 1914, and all of tbe defendants summoned to the March return day, which was March 2nd, 1914. The defendants’ appearance was entered on March 3rd, 1914. There was filed with the declaration, and served upon the defendants by the sheriff at the time he summoned the defendants the following notice: “To the defendants, William J. Giles,, Charles E. Giles and Georgianna Bush, take notice: That upon your appearance to this action a rule will be entered requiring you to plead thereto within fifteen days thereafter or judgment by default will be entered against you in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 1912, Chapter 385.” On March 18th, 1914, acting under the direction, contained in the notice above quoted, rather1 than under’ the pro visions in the statute, the defendants filed their pleas, the same being fifteen days after their appearance’ rather than ⁶⁸² fifteen days from the return, day. Thereafter on the same day that the pleas were filed the plaintiff moved for a judgment by default for want of proper pleas, and without pressing its motion, on June 11th, 1914, filed a suggestion for removal, and on the same day the transcript of the Record was ordered transmitted to the Superior Court of Baltimore City.

On the 8th day of February, 1915, judgment by default, ex parte, was entered and extended by the Superior Court of Baltimore City for the full amount claimed. Georgianna Bush, one of the defendants, having died, her administrator filed a petition in the Superior Court moving the Court to strike out the said judgment on the 7th day of June, 1917. This motion was overruled. The only question involved is whether or not the Superior Court had jurisdiction to enter the judgment.

Several reasons are assigned by the appellant for this want of jurisdiction, but it is only necessary for us to pass upon one of them, since, in our opinion, on this ground the Court did not have jurisdiction, and, therefore, the judgment was void. That ground is based upon the fact that the Circuit Court for Baltimore County exceeded its jurisdiction in directing the removal of the case to the Superior Court of Baltimore City and therefore the Superior Court’s action was void. Section 8 of Article 4 of the Constitution of Maryland is the section dealing with the right of removal of cases from one Court to another, and it provides: “In