Case Name: William A. Stewart vs. George R. Clark and William S. Cross, Trustees
Court: Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jurisdiction: Maryland
Decision Date: 1883-06-19
Citations: 60 Md. 310
Docket Number: 
Parties: William A. Stewart vs. George R. Clark and William S. Cross, Trustees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Maryland Reports
Volume: 60
Pages: 310–312

Head Matter:
William A. Stewart vs. George R. Clark and William S. Cross, Trustees.
Leasehold property — Sale—Mortgage—Taxes and Ground-rent.
“Where leasehold property, subject to a mortgage, is sold by the trustees in insolvency of the owner of such property, the taxes and ground-rent due thereon, are payable out of the proceeds of sale, though such proceeds are insufficient to satisfy the mortgage.
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas.
The appellant was the owner of the fee in a certain lot of .ground, on Eastern Avenue, in the City of Baltimore, subject to a lease of ninety-nine years, renewable forever, on payment of $350 per annum, in half-yearly instalments of $175, each on the' first day of January and July. The leasehold interest, subject to a mortgage of $1100 held by the appellant, became by sundry mesne conveyances, vested in Edward Rohlfing. The mortgage to the appellant contained the usual covenants to pay taxes, ground rent, &c. Rohlfing, the owner of the leasehold interest, applied for the benefit of the insolvent law on the 8th of May, 1880, and the appellees were appointed his permanent trustees. The trustees sold the property on the 24th of June, 1880, as also certain chattels, machinery, &c., which had been on the demised premises since 1877. The taxes for 1877, 1878 and 1879 were in arrear and unpaid, said taxes being based on a valuation or assessment of $3188 on the leasehold property, and $1500 on the personal property on the premises. The jn’oceeds of the sale of the personal property on the premises, sold by the trustees, amounted to $2605.71- • The trustees paid $689.48 for hack taxes and ground rent, and in the auditor's account which was filed, this amount was charged'against the proceeds of sale of the leasehold property, thereby reducing the amount to be received by the mortgagee. To the ratification of the auditor’s account, the mortgagee filed exceptions, the second of which was that the taxes for 1819 and 1880, on $1500, the personal property, amounting to about $55, had been charged and allowed as a lien against the leasehold estate. He also excepted to the payment of the ground rent and taxes out of the proceeds of the sale of- the leasehold property, claiming that the same should be deducted from the proceeds of the sale of the chattel property. The Court (Brown, J.,) passed an order sustaining the second exception, but overruling the other exceptions. From this order the present appeal was taken.
The cause was argued before Miller, Stone, Alvey, Irving, and Ritchie, J.
J. Wilson Leakin, for the appellant.
Fielder C. Slingluff, for the appellees.

Opinion:
Stone, J.,
delivered the opinion of the Court.
If the appellant had. foreclosed his mortgage on the leasehold property himself, and sold it, it is clear that the taxes and ground rents due thereon at the time of such sale, must have been paid out of the proceeds of the sale before the purchaser took a good title thereto. When the -same leasehold property is sold by the insolvent trustees, we fail to see upon what principle of equity, the leasehold property should be relieved from the ground rents and taxes due upon it, and the burden cast upon the other personal property of the insolvent.
The appellant had no lien on the personal property for his rents as he had not distrained. Nor is there any proof before us that any valid seizure by way of distraint,, by the Collector of the city had ever been made.
(Decided 19th June, 1883.)
Order affirmed.