Skip Navigation

6310 Hillside Court
Suite 160
Columbia, MD 21046

P. 410-290-0707

111 South Calvert Street

Suite 2700

Baltimore, MD 21202

P. 410-962-1199

Damages recoverable in summary ejectment

Summary Ejectment: Court of Appeals Limits Recoveries for Landlords

In the event of non-payment of rent or other material default, landlords are entitled to summary proceedings to obtain possession of the property.  In addition, a request can be made for a monetary judgment for outstanding rent as of the date of the hearing, provided appropriate service of process has been made.  When seeking money judgments in such proceedings, landlords routinely request attorneys' fees and other costs cast as "additional rent" when seeking possession of premises in the event of default.

On June 29, 2006, Maryland's Court of Special Appeals in Law Offices of Taiwo Agbaje, P.C. v. JLH Properties, II, LLC,  issued an opinion holding that a landlord could not recover attorneys fees as additional rent in a summary ejectment action.  

The Court relied on the decision of the Court of Appeals in Shum v. Gaudreau, 317 Md. 49 (1989), noting that "generally, contract damages could not be sought in an...ejectment proceeding." Opinion at p. 15.  In summary ejectment "'rent' is not defined by statute, but is generally defined as "payment for the tenant's use, possession and enjoyment of land."  Opinion at p. 13 citing Shum at p. 65.   Applying this principle, the Court noted that attorneys' fees, while recoverable under a contract theory, were not recoverable in summary ejectment. Contract damages would be "such a complex factual inquiry" as to "frustrate the expedited design of the summary ejectment statue."  Opinion at p. 16.

Contrarily, the Court did hold that the tenant was within its rights to raise and litigate an abatement of rent argument contractually provided for in the lease.    "[W]here a lease provides for an abatement of rent, the tenant may assert the abatement provision in an ejectment proceeding instituted".  Opinion at p. 25.  The Court rationalized that the refusal to allow such a defense would create unnecessary litigation. 

  

  


BTLG Attorneys At Law

Talk to a lawyer

Bold labels are required.

News from BTLG:

BTLG Attorneys Obtain Jury Verdict in Excess of $2.3M
BTLG attorneys obtained a verdict on November 9, 2017 for a BTLG client in excess of $2.3M after an eight-day jury trial
BTLG Attorneys Assist in Acquisition Creating $40M+ Business Combination
BTLG attorneys assisted client Optivor Technologies LLC in its acquisition of Advanced Communications Solutions Inc.
The American Rule
Maryland’s highest court has re-affirmed the adherence to the American Rule regarding attorneys’ fees, that each party must pay its own way
Joint Employers Under the Fair Labor Standards Act
Under certain circumstances when an employee works for more than one employer those employers may be considered joint employers under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”)
More BTLG News