Maryland Court upholds Landlord Self-Help Remedy

Maryland Court of Appeals Re-Affirms the Landlord Self-Help Remedy
What is “self-help”? Self-help is the act of peacefully enforcing one’s rights without resorting to the court process.  Self-help is legal in Maryland as long as it is reasonable, peaceful, and does not violate some other law.  The difficulty or complexity in implementing self-help is not to violate some other law in the process.  While potential violations are too extensive to list, a representative violation could be something as simple as breaching the terms or conditions of a lease.  A more complex violation could be that a statue or ordinance of a specific jurisdiction abolishes the self-help right available through the common law.   
Maryland recognizes self-help as a long-established common law remedy for landlords or owners of commercial and residential property management.  In the recent Maryland case on this subject Nickens v. Mount Vernon Realty Group, LLC, et al, (No. 7, September Term, 2012), the Court of Appeals of Maryland re-affirmed that “the long-recognized remedy of peaceable self-help allows a property owner to use reasonable means to repossess his, her, or its property from an unlawful possessor of that real property.”
In Nickens, the residential property owned by Nickens’ parents was foreclosed upon and sold.  Nevertheless, Nickens continued to occupy the property without the permission or authority of the new owner.  While Nickens was out of town, the new lawful owner had its agents enter the unoccupied home, change the locks, put a “no trespassing” sign on the front door, and dispose of Nickens’ personal effects before he returned.  The Court found that peaceable self-help was exercised reasonably as to the repossession of the property.[1]
The Court in Nickens found, “The public policy of restoring the lawful possession of real estate peaceably also calls for our affirmation of the reasonable use of self-help in foreclosure repossession.  For a foreclosure purchaser dispossessed of his, her, or its property by a defaulted mortgagor’s or illegal occupant’s recalcitrant possession, the common law right to self-help provides a nonviolent, reasonable approach to reclaiming the realty to which he, she, or it is entitled.”  Citing Manning v. Brown, 47 Md 506, 512 (1878); K&K Management, Inc. v. Lee, 316 Md. 137, 179, 557 A.2d 965, 985 (1989); Empire Properties, LLC v. Hardy, 386 Md. 628, 640, 873 A.2d 1187, 1194 (2005).
Another issue the Court evaluates in Nickens is the impact of a Baltimore City statue, requiring titleholders to complete the statutory process available in Baltimore City in order to repossess the property, on the common law right to peaceable self-help.  The Court explains “[f]or a statute or ordinance to abolish a right available through the common law, the statutory language must indicate an express abrogation or an abrogation by implication by adoption of a statutory scheme that is so clearly contrary to the common law right that the two cannot occupy the same space.”  Selig v. State Highway Admin., 383 Md. 655, 677, 861 A.2d 710, 723 (2004). 
Thereby, the Court interpreted “the ordinance and the common law remedy of peaceable self-help as coexistent and concurrent in the universe of Baltimore City from 2008 to the present day, such that a titleholder and its agents may choose either the process of Section 8B-2 or employ peaceable self-help by reasonable means.”
While the Court of Appeals re-affirms the landlord self-help remedy, a landlord or titleholder must proceed cautiously.  A landlord or titleholder who violates laws on self-help may face criminal charges and/or a civil suit for damages filed by the tenant or unlawful occupant.  Therefore, it is best to analyze each situation on a case-by case basis and seek the advice of counsel.
[1] Due to lack of facts regarding the disposition of Nickens’ personal effects during the property owner’s exercise of self-help, the Court reversed the judgment as to Count V Conversion and remanded the case regarding this tort.