APPEALS AND ERRORS 311

terms (as to duration, keeping an account, giving security, etc.) as to it
may seem fit, directing that the decree or order appealed from shall not be
stayed by such appeal, or only so far or on such terms as the court shall
therein direct.

Right of purchaser at a mortgage foreclosure sale to receive deed of property upon
payment of purchase price is not affected by reversal of order ratifying sale if appeal
bond hot given. Webster v. Archer, 176 Md. 245.

The rights of a purchaser of property at a judicial sale are not affected even if
the order of ratification of the sale is reversed, if a bond is not given to stay the
proceedings; effect of last portion of this section. Purchaser not relieved from lia-
bility for interest and expenses from day of sale. Raith v. Bldg. & Loan Assn.,
140 Md. 545.

The matter of staying the effect of an appeal under this section is, in the dis-
cretion of the lower court, and the action of the lower court may not be reviewed
on appeal. Forbes v. Warfield, 130 Md. 406; Crownfield v. Phillips, 125 Md. 2; State
Founders, Inc. v. Oliver, 165 Md. 366.

The failure of an appellant to stay the operation of a decree as authorized by this
section, pointed out. Konig v. Baltimore, 128 Md. 475.

An appeal from an order of a court of equity directing a sale of property, does
not stay the proceedings unless an appeal bond is filed or a stay procured. Midden-
dorf v. Refrigerating Co., 117 Md. 25; Bowles v. Moller, Inc., 163 Md. 683.

The giving of bond stays further proceedings pending the appeal. Everett v. State,
28 Md. 206.

In an injunction case, the giving of the bond stays the operation of the injunction.
Glenn v. Davis, 35 Md. 220; Gelston v. Sigmund, 27 Md. 352; Northern Central Ry.
Co. v. Canton Co.., 24 Md. 506.

The stay of proceedings does not necessarily extend further than the operation of
the order or decree appealed from. Barnum v. Barnum, 42 Md. 294.

The proceedings will not be stayed unless the bond is filed. McNeice v. Eliason,
78 Md. 179.

The bond is only to stay the proceedings and has nothing to do with the right
of appeal. Baltimore v. B. & O. R. R. Co., 21 Md. 52. See also Lee v. Pindle, 11
G. & J. 364.

The proviso clause of this section, applied. Washington County v. School Com-
missioners, 77 Md. 292.

For a discussion of the meaning and purpose of this section, see Blondheim v.
Moore, 11 Md. 371.

Prior to the adoption of this section, bonds were accepted by analogy to the practice
at law, and such bonds stayed the proceedings. Fullerton v. Miller, 22 Md. 1.

Cited but not construed in Brendel v. Zion Church, 71 Md. 85; McLuckie v. Williams,
68 Md. 265.

Court may, in its discretion, order that decree shall not be stayed by appeal, or
shall be stayed only upon such terms as court directs. It is absolute duty of court
to fix penalty of bond, but amount of penalty is in discretion of court, and not re-
viewable. When rights of purchaser not affected by reversal of decree. Shirk v.
Soper, 144 Md. 274. And see Bowers v. Soper, 148 Md. 696.

Rule that appeal will not stay execution of decree unless bond is given, is not
available to protect title vested under purchase unfairly accomplished. Herman v.
Bldg. & Loan Co., 145 Md. 490.

Appeal does not suspend operation or stay execution of decree unless bond is filed.
Holloway v. Safe Dep. & Tr. Co., 152 Md. 295.

Cited but not construed in Busey v. Perkins, 168 Md. 454; Hopper v. Harlan, 172
Md. 160.

See sec. 57, et seq., and sec. 68, et seq.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 34. 1912, sec. 30. 1904, sec. 30. 1888, sec. 28. 1830, ch. 185, sec. 1.

34. In case a party intends, on an appeal from a final decree or order in
the case, to dispute any previous order, and desires to stay the operation
of such order, he shall state his intention to dispute the same, in writing,
to be filed with the clerk, and shall give bond in such penalty as the court
may prescribe, with security to be approved by the court or the clerk, to
indemnify the other party from all loss and injury which such party may
sustain by reason of the staying of the operation of such order.

The filing of the bond does not suspend the enforcement of an order for counsel
fees and alimony. Chappell v. Chappell, 86 Md. 540.

The object of the appeal bond is to suspend the operation of the previous order,
until a final decree is passed. An appeal taken directly from such order will be dis-
missed. Lee v. Pindle, 11 G. & J. 364; Dugan v. Gittings, 3 Gill, 154.

Cited but not construed in Baltimore v. Weatherby, 52 Md. 449.