1938                                       Vetoes

MEMORANDUM

FROM STATE BAR ASSOCIATION

Section on Real Property, Planning, and Zoning

(Senate Bill 209)

The Section of Real Property, Planning & Zoning of the Mary-
land State Bar Association urges Governor Mandel to veto Senate
Bill 209.

In 1971, a similar bill (Senate Bill No. 296) was passed by
the General Assembly and was vetoed by Governor Mandel. In the
Governor's veto message, he stated:

"Recent Maryland legislation has considerably extended the
rights of non-residents to serve in other fiduciary capacities in
Maryland (Article 93 and 93A). It would seem anomalous now
to enact a law more severely restricting the rights of non-resi-
dent trustees."

Last year's bill contained numerous ambiguities and other
problems that prompted the Maryland State Bar Association to op-
pose it. In the 1971 Formal Report of the Maryland State Bar Asso-
ciation, the bill was described in the following terms: "Its provin-
cialism is less distasteful than its shabby draftsmanship." (p. 117).

Although this year's version of the bill has corrected many of the
drafting problems, the bill is still replete with ambiguities, difficulties,
and bad policy.

I.

As the Governor's veto message stated last year, Maryland has
removed all parochial barriers to non-resident fiduciaries serving in
Maryland. This bill would reverse that policy and create new bar-
riers. Indeed, one curious aspect of Senate Bill 209 is that it would
create a barrier that never has existed in Maryland. There have
never been any statutes which restrict non-resident trustees of any
type of Maryland trust. To enact this bill at the present time would
certainly be a regressive step.

It is very difficult to determine the reason why this legislation
is needed in Maryland. To the best of our knowledge, there have
been no complaints about the activities of non-resident trustees. Non-
resident trustees who own title to property in Maryland are subject
to service of process in Maryland, so that there is no problem with
respect to service where litigation is involved.

II.

The bill prohibits "non-residents" from serving as trustees.
There are few terms in the law which are more ambiguous than the
term "resident." As Judge Goodrich stated in United States v. Stab-
ler, 169 F 2nd 995, 998 (3rd Cir. 1948), residence is "a single term of
broad and ill-defined content having no exact legal meaning." One
of the leading articles on the subject states:

"Domicil has a reasonably constant meaning. Residence, on
the other hand, is one of the most variable words in the legal
dictionary."