Summary
The Maryland Court of Appeals held that Baltimore City had authority under its police power to enact rent-control legislation, even after the expiration of the state enabling statute, provided the ordinance did not conflict with the Maryland Constitution or a Public General Law. The court determined that the ordinance's restriction on evictions conflicted with state law permitting eviction of holdover tenants and was therefore invalid. Because the eviction provisions were integral to the rent-control scheme, the court held that the entire ordinance had to fall.
Court
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jurisdiction
Maryland
Decision date
October 10, 2001
Docket number
No. 10, October Term, 1954 (Adv.)
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Questions Presented
- Whether Baltimore City retained authority under its police power to enact rent-control legislation after the expiration of Maryland's rent-control enabling statute.
- Whether the ordinance's eviction restrictions conflicted with Maryland's Public General Laws governing eviction of holdover tenants.
- Whether the invalid eviction provision could be severed from the ordinance so that the remaining rent-control provisions would survive.
Holdings
- Baltimore City had power under its police power to enact rent-control legislation even in the absence of an effective enabling act, provided the legislation did not conflict with the Maryland Constitution or any Public General Law.
- The ordinance's provision barring landlords from recovering possession after a lease expired conflicted with the Public General Laws permitting eviction of holdover tenants and was therefore invalid.
- The entire rent-control ordinance had to fall because its rent-regulation provisions were impractical and ineffective without the invalid eviction restrictions, notwithstanding the ordinance's separability clause.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…