Brashears v. Collison

Decision Date09 June 1955
Docket NumberNo. 136,136
Citation115 A.2d 289,207 Md. 339
PartiesB. Raymond BRASHEARS et al. v. Minnie E. COLLISON et al. Thomas E. COLLISON et ux. v. David W. COLLISON et al.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Marvin I. Anderson and Malcolm B. Smith, Annapolis, for B. Raymond Brashears and others.

George B. Woelfel, Annapolis (Thomas J. Curley, Annapolis, on the brief), for Thomas E. Collision and others.

Wilmer D. Pyles, Upper Marlboro (Arthur G. Lambert, Rockville, on the brief), for J. D. Hedin and others.

C. Maurice Weidemeyer, Annapolis (Basil E. Moore, Jr., Annapolis, on the brief), for Harry Orme and wife.

Charles F. Stein, Jr., Baltimore (O. Bowie Duckett, Annapolis, on the brief), for National Central Bank of Baltimore.

Before BRUNE, C. J., and DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, HENDERSON and HAMMOND, JJ.

COLLINS, Judge.

This is an appeal from a decree denying the reopening of a decree of foreclosure of property sold at tax sale as to some interested parties, and reopening and declaring null and void the decree of foreclosure as to other parties.

The facts of the case are substantially as follows. Nicholas G. Collison died testate in Anne Arundel County on or about May 30, 1908, seized and possessed, among other things, of certain real estate including a tract of land containing approximately twenty acres in Anne Arundel County. By his last will and testament, dated February 26, 1907, he devised this twenty-acre tract of land to his son, David W. Collision, 'for and during his, the said David W's life and at his death to go to his children lawfully begotten share and share alike the Child or Children of any deceased child of said David's to take the parents share.' After a number of other devises and bequests, he devised and bequeathed all the rest and residue of his estate 'to be divided equally share and share alike among those of my grandchildren, only, who are heretofore named in this Will, said shares to be paid or deposited in the manner prescribed in the specific bequests and devises to them severally made.' This will was admitted to probate on June 9, 1908, and David W. Collison qualified as executor. He paid the taxes on the land through the year 1936 but failed to pay the taxes thereon for the years 1937 and 1938. The Treasurer of Anne Arundel County on October 10, 1938, sold the property for non-payment of taxes for $36, being the amount in arrears including interests and costs, to Minnie E. Collison, the wife of David W. Collison, and one of the appellees here. This sale was reported to the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County and an order passed on November 2, 1939, ratifying and confirming the sale. The Treasurer and County Commissioners of Anne Arundel County by deed dated December 19, 1936, conveyed the property to Minnie E. Collison in fee simple.

Under the provisions of Chapter 761, of the Acts of 1943, known as the Tax Sales Act, Code 1951, Article 81, Section 72-90 inclusive, which provided a proceeding wherein the equity of redemption of former owners of real estate sold at tax sale could be foreclosed, a tax sale certificate was issued on September 8, 1944, to Minnie E. Collison, showing the sale of the real estate purchased by her at the tax sale. The said Minnie E. Collison, on September 20, 1944, assigned the certificate of tax sale to Thomas E. Collison, a nephew of her husband, but not one of the grandchildren named in the will of Nicholas G. Collison. Three days later, on September 23, 1944, Thomas E. Collison and Etta Mae Collison, his wife, among the appellees, and the cross-appellants in this case, filed a bill of complaint against his uncle, David W. Collison, the life tenant 'and all persons having or claiming to have any interest in the property assessed to David W. Collison '20 acres and improvements, Mayo District No. 1,' * * *.' They asked that the right of redemption in said property be foreclosed. This bill of complaint recited, among other things, the fact that the tax sale was made to Minnie E. Collison, who was the wife of David W. Collison, 'who held a life interest therein under the will of his father, Nicholas G. Collison, * * * to go to his children lawfully begotten share and share alike * * *' and that the said David W. Collison was still living and had no children prior to the tax sale nor did he have any children at the time the bill of complaint was filed. The order of publication was published 'warning all persons having or claiming to have an interest in the property to answer the bill of complaint or to redeem the property on or before the thirtieth day of November, 1944.' A decree pro confesso was taken against David W. Collison 'and all persons having or claiming to have an interest in the property' on December 1, 1944. On December 28, 1944, a final decree of foreclosure was entered and the solicitor for Thomas E. Collison and wife was appointed to convey the real estate to the said Thomas E. Collison and wife in fee simple. This decree of foreclosure provided in part that 'all rights of redemption of all Defendants whether named or not and of all persons having or claiming to have any interest in the property * * * be and they are hereby forever foreclosed.' The trustee, on January 8, 1945, executed a deed in fee simple to Thomas E. Collison and wife for the said twenty acres of land.

Since the execution of that deed Thomas E. Collison and wife have been in possession of the property, built a store thereon, have had plats prepared, and caused it to be subdivided into lots. They are still in possession of some of these lots but have made conveyances of others. On March 2, 1946, they conveyed to Marshall Barnes and wife three lots which were mortgaged by Barnes and wife to the Annapolis Banking and Trust Company, one of the appellees here. On January 19, 1950, Barnes and wife conveyed the lots, subject to the aforesaid mortgage, to Paul D. Collison and wife, two of the appellees here. On February 3, 1950, Thomas E. Collison and wife conveyed to Harry Orme and wife, appellees herein, nine lots subject to a purchase money mortgage to Thomas E. Collison and wife. On February 28, 1950, Thomas E. Collison and wife conveyed eight lots to J. D. Hedin, one of the appellees here, which are subject to a mortgage to the National Central Bank of Baltimore, one of the appellees.

David W. Collison died on or about July 30, 1950, without leaving any child or children or descendants surviving. The only child ever born to David W. Collison died in infancy in 1896, twelve years before the death of Nicholas G. Collison. On September 19, 1953, some of the residuary devisees in the will of Nicholas G. Collison filed a bill of complaint wherein they prayed that the tax sale herein and the proceedings for the foreclosure of the right of redemption be declared null and void, and the property sold for the purposes of partition. A demurrer was sustained to that bill. On March 16, 1954, four of the grandchildren, named as residuary devisees in the will of Nicholas G. Collison, filed a petition in the foreclosure case praying that the proceedings therein be reopened; that the tax sales be declared null and void; and for other and further relief. After answer filed, testimony was taken in open court by the chancellor. He decreed on October 15, 1954, that the petition be dismissed as to so much of the land as was conveyed by Thomas E. Collison and Etta Mae Collison, his wife, to the Barnes, the Ormes and J. D. Hedin. He further decreed that the decree of foreclosure be reopened and declared null and void as to the petitioners, appellants here, as to all the lands other than the part conveyed by Thomas E. Collison and wife to the said Barnes, Ormes and J. D. Hedin, and that Thomas E. Collison and wife pay the costs of the proceedings.

From that decree that appellants, petitioners B. Raymond Brashears and Rose Brashears, his wife; David Clifton Dawson and Yetive C. Dawson, his wife; Elsie Winstead Hutchinson and Orion Neely Hutchinson, her husband; Myrtle Collison Young and William O. Young, her husband, hereinafter designated as appellants, and Thomas E. Collison and Etta Mae Collison, his wife, hereinafter designated as cross-appellants, appeal to this Court.

Chapter 761, Section 90M, of the Acts of 1943, Code 1951, Article 81, Section 111, provides: '(Decree of Court Conclusive.) No application shall be thereafter entertained to reopen any final decree rendered under the provisions of this sub-title except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction or fraud in the conduct of the proceedings to foreclose. If the final decree of the court foreclosing all rights of redemption is set aside on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, the amount required to redeem shall be the amount required by the provisions of this sub-title, and in addition thereto, the reasonable value, at the date the decree is set aside, of all improvements made on the property by the purchaser and his successors in interest.'

It is provided by Chapter 761, Section 90C, of the Acts of 1943, Code 1951, Article 81, Section 101, as follows: '(Parties.) The plaintiff in any proceeding to foreclose the right of redemption shall be the holder of the certificate of sale. The defendants in any such proceeding shall be the following: (a) The owner of the property as disclosed by a search of the Land Records of the County, of the records of the Register of Wills of the County, and of the records of any court of law or equity of the County. (b) If the property be subject to a ground rent, the parties defendant shall be the owner of the fee simple title and the owner of the leasehold title as disclosed by a search of the Land Records of the County, of the records of the Register of Wills of the County and of the records of any court of law or equity of the County. (c) Any mortgagee of the property or his assignee of record, named as such in any unreleased mortgage recorded among the Land Records...

To continue reading

Request your trial
53 cases
  • Dillow v. Magraw
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • 1 Septiembre 1994
    ...or where the property owners or their heirs are simply not notified of the foreclosure proceedings at all. Brashears v. Collison, 207 Md. 339, 347-48, 115 A.2d 289 (1955) (holding decree null and void due to failure to name owners of a remainder interest in property as defendants in foreclo......
  • Magraw v. Dillow
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 1 Septiembre 1995
    ...in perpetuity until such time as that right of redemption is foreclosed by a proper legal proceeding. See Brashears v. Collison, 207 Md. 339, 351-54, 115 A.2d 289, 295-96 (1955) (holding that a right of redemption not barred by laches); Heill v. Staniewski, 265 Md. 722, 725, 291 A.2d 449, 4......
  • Liddy v. Lamone
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • 29 Marzo 2007
    ...of each case." Ross, 387 Md. at 669, 876 A.2d at 704, quoting Parker, 230 Md. at 130, 186 A.2d at 197, citing Brashears v. Collison, 207 Md. 339, 352, 115 A.2d 289, 295 (1955); Bowie v. Ford, 269 Md. 111, 122, 304 A.2d 803, 810 (1973); Day v. Day, 237 Md. 229, 236, 205 A.2d 798, 803 It is, ......
  • State Ctr., LLC v. Lexington Charles Ltd. P'ship
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • 27 Marzo 2014
    ...be determined by the facts and circumstances of each case." Parker, 230 Md. at 130, 186 A.2d at 197 (citing Brashears v. Collison, 207 Md. 339, 352, 115 A.2d 289, 295 (1955)). "The passage of time, alone, does not constitute laches but is simply 'one of the many circumstances from which a d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT