Hopkins v. Holland

Citations

• 84 Md. 84
• 35 A. 11
• 1896 Md. LEXIS 93

Syllabus

<p>Landlord, and Tenant—Distraint for Rent after Appeal from fudgment of Ouster—Waiver of Forfeiture—■Tenant Wrongfully -Holding Over— Writ of Restitution as Estoppel.</p> <p>After a landlord has elected to terminate a tenancy, and has obtain.ed a judgment of ejectment from which the tenant appeals and holds over during the appeal, the mere acceptance of rent by the landlord for the time of such holding over does not estop him from enforcing a writ of restitution after the judgment of ouster is affirmed on appeal.</p> <p>When a.landlord obtains a judgment of ejectment against his tenant and the latter appeals therefrom under Code, Art. 53, sec. 4, the tenant retains possession until the determination of the appeal, provided he gives bond to pay all rent in arrears and all rent which ' shall accrue pending the appeal. In this case, after the appeal was determined in favor of the landlord and judgment of ouster entered, he issued a distraint for the rent due after the expiration of the lease. This was paid by the assignee of file tenant with his consent. A warrant of restitution was then issued in the ejectment case and the tenant applied for an injunction to restrain the execution of the same. Held, that the acceptance of the -subsequently accruing rent under these circumstances by the landlord was no waiver of his right to enforce the judgment ¡p ejectment, or election to create a new tenancy, because under the statute the tenant was bound to pay ' rent as long as he remained in possession pending the appeal.</p>