541, 543-44, 82 A. 442, 443 (1911) (noting that judicial sales made by court-appointed trustees are “transactions between the Court and the purchasers, and as such, are regulated by all the principles of equity applicable to judicial sales” (citations omitted)); Talbert, 210 Md. at 43, 122 A.2d at 473. This Court has held that “[t]he bid of the purchaser, its acceptance, the report of the trustee, and its final ratification by the court, are all successive steps in the formation and completion of a perfect and binding contract of sale[.]” Mizen v. Thomas, 156 Md. 313, 322-23, 144 A. 479, 483 (1929). Thus, any dealings between the trustee and the third party purchaser are transactions that must be ratified by the court before they become binding. Talbert, 210 Md. at 43, 122 A.2d at 473 (<HOLDING>); Waters v. Prettyman, 165 Md. 70, 75, 166 A.
holding that a purchaser will not be required to consummate a sale if it would be inequitable to require him to do so especially where there has been misrepresentation intentional or otherwise on the part of the trustee in an advertisement citations omitted holding that until a judicial sale by a trustee is ratified by the court it is an executory contract  an offer to purchase which has not been accepted quotations and citations omitted holding that the business judgment test applies to the determination of whether a trustee should be allowed to reject an executory contract for the sale of real estate under  365 holding that subsequent to a judicial sale the report of the sale must be made to and ratified by the court before a deed for the property is given by the trustee to the purchaser holding that a written offer accepted by parol may constitute a sufficient memorandum of the contract provided the person making the offer is the party to be charged