29 A.3d 714
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2011Background
- Original Tract (7.8023 acres) was administratively split by SDAT into two parcels (3.8 acres with a residence, and 4-acre subject property) without separate metes-and-bounds descriptions.
- Tax sale occurred in 1997 for both accounts; certificate of sale purchased by Deinlein for the subject property; neither sale advertisement nor certificate contained a metes-and-bounds description.
- Deinlein pursued foreclosure of the right of redemption in 1999; later litigation included a quiet-title action and counterclaims, with Johnson involved as a party.
- Court initially foreclosed the right of redemption in 2002 but later vacated and reinstated the foreclosure order; Johnson redeemed only the 3.8-acre parcel, not the subject 4-acre parcel.
- In 2010, after voiding the sale and ordering reimbursements for some taxes/costs, the circuit court denied Deinlein’s request for extraordinary attorney’s fees under TP § 14-843(a)(4)(ii).
- The court also awarded alternative relief under TP § 14-848 (reimbursement of certain expenses) after voiding the sale; Deinlein appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether extraordinary fees under TP § 14-843(a)(4)(ii) apply. | Deinlein seeks extraordinary fees incurred in pursuing quiet title. | County contends 2008 amendment is prospective only and not applicable here. | No; 14-843(a)(4)(ii) does not apply retroactively to pre-amendment actions. |
| Whether TP § 14-848 requires reimbursement after voiding a tax sale. | Upon voiding, Deinlein should recover all taxes, fees, and related costs. | TP § 14-848 covers reimbursement where sale is voided and is limited by related statutes. | Yes for certain reimbursements; extraordinary fees not recoverable under 14-848, and full recovery not mandated. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dawson v. Prince George's County, 324 Md. 481 (1991) (outlines tax sale procedures and reimbursement framework)
- Howard County v. Heartwood 88, LLC, 178 Md.App. 491 (2008) (limits on post-sale fee recovery; ties to redemption)
- Canaj, Inc. v. Baker & Div. Phase III, 391 Md. 374 (2006) (priority of redeemability and redemption-related relief)
- Heartwood 88, Inc. v. Montgomery County, 156 Md.App. 333 (2004) (redemption prerequisite to statutory attorney's fees)
- Montgomery County v. Heartwood 88, Inc., 156 Md.App. 333 (2004) (discusses redemption prerequisite to fees under prior TP § 14-843)