Schapiro v. Baltimore Trust Co.

⁵¹ Briscoe, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is the second appeal in this case. The first appeal is reported in 140 Md. 557 , wherein this Court reversed an order of the Circuit Court Ho*. 2 of Baltimore City, which had sustained certain exceptions of Morris Schapiro, purchaser, to the ratification of a sale of the property here in question to him, and the canse was remanded to the end that the sale last reported should be ratified and confirmed. On May 10th, 1922, after the mandate from this Court was received by the court below, the sale to Morris Schapiro was in due course finally ratified and confirmed by Circuit Court Ho. 2 of Baltimore City.

Thereafter, on June 13th, 1922, the appellant filed a petition in the Circuit Court Ho*. 2 of Baltimore City, tendering the sum of $33,749.81, being the difference between the purchase price and the amount of the tax assessed by the United States Government, and asking for an order directing the Baltimore Trust- Company, the trustee, to execute and deliver a deed to the petitioner for the property on receipt of this payment. The trustee also filed a petition for a; resale of the property, at the risk of the purchaser, for a failure to* comply with the terms of sale. The petitions were heard on testimony and argument, after which Circuit Court Ho. 2 of Baltimore City directed that the appellant, the purchaser of the property, pay to the trustee the balance of the purchase money under his contract, according to the following decree passed on the 2nd day of August, 1923: “Decree. “The petition of the Baltimore Trust Company, Trustee, filed herein on the 13th day of June, 1922, and the petition of Morris Schapiro filed herein on the same day, each of said petitions having been filed as original petitions, and by agreement of the parties ⁵² and by direction of tbe Court, also as answers each petition to the other, having been read and considered, testimony having been taken in open court on the issues raised by said petitions and answers and counsel for the parties having been heard, it is thereupon, this 2nd day of August, 1222, adjudged, ordered and decreed by the Circuit Court Ho. 2 of Baltimore City, that on or before the end of five days from the date hereof, Morris Schapiro pay the balance of the purchase money due the trustee in this case under the contract of sale herein, and under the decision of the Court of Appeals filed herein on the 3rd day of March, 1922, with all interest thereon from June 12, 1922. And it is further ordered, that in making up such balance no allowance shall be made to the said Morris Schapiro for any liens on said property, due to the United States of America or to any department thereof, and particularly no allowance shall be made to him for the lien of said United States of America referred to in the decision of the Court of Appeals, and in the said petition of said Morris Schapiro, this Court hereby decreeing that under the terms of said contract of sale, and under the said decision of the Court of Appeals that said Schapiro must pay all such liens, if any; this Court decreeing that it is not necessary or proper for it to determine whether or not the said United States of America or any department thereof has any lien or liens against said property, or any part or parts thereof. “Provided, however, that no proceedings shall be taken under and by virtue of this order until after the end of five days from the date hereof, and provided further that no proceedings hereunder shall be stayed or affected by virtue of the taking or filing any appeal to the Court of Appeals of Maryland from this order unless there likewise be filed an appeal bond in usual form with a local corporate surety or sureties, to be approved by this Court or the clerk thereof in the penalty of one hundred thousand dollars. ⁵³ “And provided further, that if at the end of the time aforesaid the said Schapiro either shall not pay-said above-named sums or file said bond, this Court will pass the usual order, directing the said trustee to sell said property at the risk of the said Schapiro. “And it is further ordered that the said Schapiro pay the costs of said petitions and the proceedings thereunder.” From this decree, as passed, Morris Schapiro-, the purchaser and the appellant on this record, has taken this appeal.

The facts of the case were fully set out in the record on the former appeal and are also sufficiently stated, in the record now before us,