clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
The Annotated Code of the Public General Laws of Maryland, 1939
Volume 379, Page 597   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

CHANCERY 597

An. Code, 1924, sec. 141. 1912, sec. 134. 1904, sec. 126. 1888, sec. 113. 1795, ch. 88, sec. 1.

1820, ch. 161, sec. 3.

148. Any non-resident, or person proceeded against as a non-resident,
may appear and answer before final decree, on such reasonable terms as

the court may prescribe.

Where, upon an appeal from a decree of sale, a case is remanded that further proof
may be taken, a defendant may appear and answer. Johnson v. Robertson, 34 Md. 172.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 142. 1912, sec. 135. 1904, sec. 127. 1888, sec. 114. 1773, ch. 7, sec. 3.

1787, ch. 30, sec. 2. 1795, ch. 88, sec. 1. 1797, ch. 114, sec. 3. 1799, ch. 79, sec. 1.

1818, ch. 133, sec. 1. 1826, chs. 178, 199. 1841, ch. 22, secs. 3-5. 1842,

ch. 299, secs. 4, 5. 1852, ch. 173, sec. 4. 1868, ch. 435. 1888,

ch. 486. 1896, ch. 68.

149. In all suits in chancery against non-residents or against persons
who may be proceeded against, as if they were non-residents, the court
may order notice to be given by publication, in one or more newspapers,
stating the substance and object of the bill or petition, and warning such
party to appear on or before the day fixed in such order and show cause
why the relief prayed should not be granted, and such notice shall be pub-
lished as the court may direct, not less, however, than once a week for four
successive weeks, previous to fifteen days before the day fixed by such order
for the appearance of the party; provided, if a copy of the order be person-
ally served on such party one month before the day fixed for his appear-
ance, if he be within the limits of the United States, or three months if
beyond, such service shall have the same effect as a publication. Proof of
said service must be as follows: First, if served by the sheriff, his certifi-
cate thereof; second, if by any other person, his affidavit or affirmation
thereof made and signed before a notary public and certified by him; third,
the written admission of the defendant proved to the satisfaction of the
court; and such certificate, affidavit, affirmation or admission shall state
the time and place of service. And any person making a false affidavit or
affirmation as to any such service shall be guilty of perjury, and any sheriff
making a false certificate as to the service of any such notice shall be liable
for making a false return.

Theory of notice by publication. Strict compliance with the requirements of the
statute required, but questions of whether the non-resident saw the notice, or was able
to respond to it, are immaterial. Dorsey v. Dorsey, 30 Md. 534; Dorsey v. Thompson,
37 Md. 44. Cf. Johnson v. Robertson, 34 Md. 173.

Proof that the notice required by this section was given, held insufficient, and a
recital of the decree that the order of publication "had been duly published," held
not to cure the defect. Johnson v. Robertson, 31 Md. 488.

An order of publication on a bill to redeem a ground rent, held to substantially
describe the property. Hollander v. Central Metal Co., 109 Md. 149.

Where the order of publication was only published for three weeks, instead of one
month (as provided by the act of 1842, ch. 229), the decree was reversed. Central
Bank v. Copeland, 18 Md. 320.

The act of 1896, ch. 38 (providing a method of service in lieu of an order of publica-
tion), does not give equity courts jurisdiction of non-residents in actions in personam,
Fisher v. Parr, 92 Md. 272.

The act of 1896, ch. 38 (providing a method of service in lieu of an order of publica-
tion), applied. Chappell v. Clarke, 94 Md. 182.

For a case dealing with the act of 1799, ch. 79, sec. 1, see Burd v. Greenleaf, 1 Bl. 557.

Cited but not construed in Neale v. Hagthorp, 3 Bl. 573; Buckingham v. Peddicord,
2 Bl. 457; Contee v. Dawson, 2 Bl. 306.

See notes to sec. 149.

As to the issue of orders of publication by the clerks of the courts having jurisdiction,
see art. 17, sec. 45.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 143. 1912, sec. 136. 1904, sec. 128. 188S, sec. 115. 1884, ch. 268.

150. Upon application for a renewal of a lease containing a covenant
for renewal, where any person or persons interested in the reversion re-


 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
The Annotated Code of the Public General Laws of Maryland, 1939
Volume 379, Page 597   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives