MARVIN MANDEL, Governor                                 227

section and §6—202.

Paragraph (4) is new language derived from
Rules BQ40 and BQ53(a). It should be noted
that replevin is technically a local action
while detinue is not.

Paragraph (5) is new language derived from
Art. 16, §66(b) and Art. 26, §70-4.

Paragraph (6) is new language combining the
provisions of Art. 75, §12 and Art. 90,
§11(d) .

Paragraph (7) is new language derived from
Rule T—41(a)(2). Ejectment is a local action
which fits the general rule, with the
exception noted in this paragraph.

Paragraph (8) is new language derived from
Art. 75, §75(c). It should be noted that
this paragraph may be qualified by §6-203(d).

Paragraph (9) is new language derived from
Art. 9, §36. The section has been
substantively changed, in a minor way, by
allowing (under §6—201) suit to be brought
where the defendant works as well as where he
resides.

Paragraph (10) is new language derived from
Art. 75, §80. Apparently this venue is in
addition to the general rule, although under
some constructions it might be construed to
be the exclusive venue for such suits.

Paragraph (11) codifies the rule of Alcarese
v. Stinger, 197 Md. 236 (1951).

Paragraphs (12) and (13) state the general
rule found in Art. 75, §§ 75 (a) and 79 with
respect to persons absconding from justice.
The provisions relating to a person twice
returned non—est is proposed for deletion as
unnecessary in light of current rules and
statutes which allow State—wide service of
process.

SEC. 6-203. EXCEPTIONS TO THE GENERAL RULE.
(A) IN GENERAL.