Kermisch v. Savings Bank of Baltimore

Decision Date23 October 1972
Docket NumberNo. 19,19
Citation295 A.2d 776,266 Md. 557
PartiesAlbert KERMISCH and Bessie T. Kermisch, Indiv. and t/a Kermisch's v. The SAVINGS BANK OF BALTIMORE.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Irving Settleman, Baltimore, for appellants.

Edward S. Digges, Jr., Baltimore (Charles T. Albert and Joseph G. Finnerty, Jr., Baltimore, on the brief), for appellee.

Argued before MURPHY, C. J., and BARNES, McWILLIAMS, SINGLEY, SMITH and DIGGES, JJ.

SMITH, Judge.

This dispute involves interpretation of a clause in a deed made in 1967 when appellee, The Savings Bank of Baltimore (the Bank), acquired land for the construction of a branch bank at the corner of Liberty and Glenmichael Roads in Baltimore. The land was purchased from appellants, Albert Kermisch and Bessie T. Kermisch, 'individually and co-partners trading as Kermisch's' (Kermisch). Reference is made in the deed to a parcel of 0.222 acres adjoining. The Bank claims an easement for parking on that land, which is disputed by Kermisch.

The Bank filed a bill in equity. It requested a decree requiring Kermisch to remove certain barricades, an injunction against interference with the Bank's use of the land, and damages for wrongful interference with its right of easement. The chancellor (MacDaniel, J.) decided in favor of the Bank. We shall do likewise.

The disputed paragraph in the deed is:

'THIS AGREEMENT FURTHER WITNESSETH: that in consideration as aforesaid Grantors and Grantee do hereby mutually covenant and agree for themselves, their respective heirs, successors and assigns that Grantee shall have the right of use of the area, hereinafter described, in common with others for the purpose of parking and with a route of access to and from the property it is acquiring herein, and Grantors shall execute such further agreements as may be required by Baltimore County or any other governmental agency having jurisdiction adding to the property Grantee is acquiring herein such off-street parking and loading area and spaces as may be required by the said governmental authorities as a condition fo issuing a permit to Grantee to erect a building on the property it is acquiring herein containing 4,000 square feet of retail trade floor area on each of two levels. It is understood and agreed that access from this parking lot to Glenmichael Road at a point where this lot adjoins said Glenmichael Road shall be kept open at all times and that a route of access to and from this lot and other property owned by Grantors shall be kept open at all times. Grantors agree to permit Grantee to pave any part of said area or to provide a durable and dustless surface and to make such other improvements, at its expense, to enable said area or part thereof to be used for off-street parking and loading in compliance with all governmental requirements. Grantors reserve the right, at their expense, to provide a comparable substitute parking area by recorded agreement on the property immediately adjoining to the east of the aforesaid parking area, at any time that Grantors so desire, and the governmental agencies having jurisdiction shall permit, and said substitute area shall contain improvements equal to those made by Grantee on the parking area herein described. The said...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Hill v. Cross Country
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • 3 December 2007
    ... ... Abramowitz and Christina Bolmarcich of Bouland & Brush, LLC of Baltimore), on brief, for respondent ...         Jeffrey L. Forman (Bruce ... In 1999, Sasso obtained a home equity loan from Provident Bank ("Provident") using the Property as security for the loan. Provident ... ...
  • Eaglehead Corp. v. Cambridge Capital Group, Inc., AMD 01-2055.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • 31 October 2001
    ...of a written instrument. See, e.g., Equitable Trust Co. v. Imbesi, 287 Md. 249, 271, 412 A.2d 96 (1980); Kermisch v. Savings Bank of Balto., 266 Md. 557, 560, 295 A.2d 776 (1972); Foreman v. Melrod, 257 Md. 435, 442, 263 A.2d 559 (1970); Rinaudo v. Bloom, 209 Md. 1, 9-10, 120 A.2d 184 (1956......
  • Contracts Mat. Proc. v. Kataleuna Gmbh Catalysts
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • 18 September 2001
    ...a written instrument. See, e.g., Equitable Trust Co. v. Imbesi, 287 Md. 249, 271, 412 A.2d 96, 107 (1980); Kermisch v. Savings Bank of Baltimore, 266 Md. 557, 560, 295 A.2d 776 (1972); Foreman v. Melrod, 257 Md. 435, 442, 263 A.2d 559, 562 (1970); Rinaudo v. Bloom, 209 Md. 1, 9-10, 120 A.2d......
  • Bankers & Shippers Ins. Co. of New York v. Urie
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • 9 December 1977
    ...that the parties meant what they expressed, Little v. First Federated Life, 267 Md. 1, 296 A.2d 372 (1972); Kermisch v. Savings Bank, 266 Md. 557, 295 A.2d 776 (1972); Devereux v. Berger, 253 Md. 264, 252 A.2d 469 (1969). And, when the language of a contract is clear, the true test of what ......
  • 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