Johnson v. Johnson
32 A.3d 1072
Md.2011Background
- Trustees Catherine Moreland Johnson and Edward Johnson created the Johnson Family Trust with two shares to be held for their lifetimes and then distributed.
- Edward died in 2006; the Trust was to divide into Trust A (for Catherine) and Trust B (irrevocable).
- Catherine had income and principal rights in Trust A during her life and a limited power of appointment over Trust B; if not exercised, Trust B is distributed per Article VI to James as a beneficiary.
- James, a beneficiary, requested an accounting from Catherine after her failure to respond to prior inquiries.
- Circuit Court granted petition for jurisdiction and ordered Catherine to provide an accounting; petitioner appealed to higher court.
- Higher courts contemplated whether the order granting an accounting was an appealable final or interlocutory judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the circuit court order for an accounting appealable? | Johnson contends the order is appealable as a final judgment. | Moreland Johnson contends the order is not a final or interlocutory appeal, thus not appealable. | Order not appealable; remanded to dismiss. |
| Does § 12-303(3)(vi) authorize an appeal from this order? | Section permits appeals from orders determining a right and directing an accounting. | The order did not determine a right between the parties and thus falls outside § 12-303(3)(vi). | Not within § 12-303(3)(vi); therefore not appealable. |
| Is the Circuit Court's order appealable under the collateral order doctrine or Rule 2-602? | Argues interlocutory appeal may lie under collateral order doctrine or 2-602. | Contends neither doctrine applies here because the order does not resolve an issue requiring immediate appeal. | Not appealable under collateral order doctrine or Rule 2-602. |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. Johnson, 184 Md.App. 643 (2009) (trust accounting context; Court of Special Appeals decision cited)
- Snowden v. Dorsey, 6 App. Court J. 114 (1823) (order for an accounting not final; preparatory to decree)
- Anthony Plumbing v. Atty. Gen., 298 Md. 11 (1983) (accounting-related appealability considerations)
- Hohensee v. Minear, 253 Md. 5 (1969) (limitations on appeals from accounting orders)
- Johnson v. Hoover, 75 Md. 486 (1892) (historical limitations on appeals from accounting orders)
- Wilhelm v. Caylor, 32 Md. 151 (1870) (early rule on accounting orders and appealability)
- Clagett v. Crawford, 12 G. & J. 275 (1841) (order directing an account must adjudicate a right)
- Nally v. Long, 56 Md. 567 (1881) (rights settled by accounting order render it appealable)
- Goodburn v. Stevens, 1 Md.Ch. 420 (1849) (right of appeal from accounting orders depends on rights determined)
- Owings v. Worthington, 4 Md. 260 (1853) (same principle on appealability of accounting orders)
- Stachowski v. State, 416 Md. 276 (2010) (courts sua sponte address jurisdictional issues)
- WSSC v. Bowen, 410 Md. 287 (2009) (final judgment rule and interlocutory appeals framework)
- Salvagno v. Frew, 388 Md. 605 (2005) (final judgment exceptions to appealability)
- Clagett v. Crawford, 12 G. & J. 275 (1841) (historical standard for appealability of accounting orders)