The trustee did not respond to her Exception, so Ms. Anderson filed a Motion to Show Cause. Mr. Joseph then filed an Answer, wherein he explained the money from the loan had benefited the property, so both he and Ms. Anderson should be equally responsible. Ms. Anderson in turn argued that even if the loan was used for repairs to the house, Mr. Joseph was unable to encumber her interest in the property without her authorization. After a hearing on the matter, the Circuit Court denied Ms. Anderson’s Exception and Motion to Show Cause. However, the Court of Special Appeals disagreed with the Circuit Court, concluding the loan did not encumber Ms. Anderson’s interest in the property, so it should only have been paid out of Mr. Joseph’s share of the proceeds. The fact that the money was spent on repairs to the home made no difference. Ms. Anderson had no knowledge of the flood; she was unable to have given consent to repair damages for it.

Though Mr. Joseph was not represented by counsel and did not file a brief or appear for argument before the Court of Special Appeals, the Court discussed whether or not Mr. Joseph would be entitled to a credit for the repair, if he had preserved the argument. They concluded that he would not. A co-tenant is only entitled to contribution from another cotenant for repairs when the when they are authorized or when they are necessary for the preservation of the property and the other co-tenant has refused to participate in the repairs. Here, Ms. Anderson was unaware of the need for repairs, so she did not authorize the repairs nor did she refuse to repair the property. The Circuit Court was reversed, and Mr. Joseph was ordered to pay costs.