3438

VETOES

that those persons who would be entitled to shares of a
dealer's estate if he died intestate are awarded by
operation of law his "rights and duties" under his marketing
agreement. By definition, this interpretation not only
precludes a dealer from devising his interests in operation
of his service station by will to do his spouse or some
other beneficiary but also precludes any contractual
provision of his marketing agreement from controlling the
transfer upon the dealer's death.

The title of House Bill 1813 does no, in our opinion,
fairly describe the operation of the proposed statute. The
title states:

FOR the purpose of providing that on the death of a retail
service station dealer, the dealer's rights and duties
under a marketing agreement pass to the personal
representative.

The term "personal representative" is also a term of art
under the Estates and Trusts Article. Section 1-101(o)
provides: "'Personal representative' includes an executor or
administrator but not a special administrator." Under the
Estates and Trusts Article generally, a personal
representative is responsible for collecting the assets,
paying the just debts, and administering the affairs of the
decedent. It is clear that a person reading the title of
House Bill 1813 would be incorrectly led to believe that the
proposed amendment would provide that the deceased dealer's
rights and duties under his marketing agreement would pass
as part of his estate into the custody of his personal
representative and be administered generally according to
the laws set forth in Estates and Trusts Article. Of
course, this interpretation is inconsistent with the actual
operation of the proposed statute. Therefore, it is our
opinion, that House Bill 1813 is unconstitutional because of
this titling defect. Md. Const., Art. III, § 29.1/ In
addition, we do not believe that the inconsistent and
misleading provisions of this relatively short title may be
severed to correct this defect. See City of Baltimore v.
State, 281 Md. 217 (1977), 58 Opinions of the Attorney
General 75 (1973).

In sum, it is our opinion that House Bill 1813 is
unconstitutional because of a defect in its title.

Very truly yours,
Stephen H. Sachs
Attorney General

1/ We have not considered and specifically reserve the
question of whether a State law governing the
disposition of a deceased dealer's rights and duties