Dietzman v. Sharbono

Montana Supreme Court

Dietzman v. Sharbono

353 P.2d 99, 137 Mont. 526, 1960 Mont. LEXIS 44

CourtMontana Supreme Court

DecidedJune 21, 1960

DocketNo. 10062

StatusPublished

This text of 353 P.2d 99 (Dietzman v. Sharbono) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dietzman v. Sharbono, 353 P.2d 99, 137 Mont. 526, 1960 Mont. LEXIS 44 (Mo. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE HARRISON

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

This is an appeal by the plaintiffs from an order granting a motion for change of venue entered in the district court of the fourth judicial district, Missoula County.

Service of summons and complaint was made upon defen- • dants in the County of Missoula. On defendant Puyear’s application the court granted a change of venue to Ravalli County. Plaintiffs appealed from the order and defendant Puyear has confessed the error of the court and consents that the order may be reversed. Since it appears that Missoula County is a proper county for the trial of this case, the cause is remanded to the district court with instructions to annul and vacate the order granting the motion and to make and enter an order denying the same. Remittitur to issue forthwith.

MR. JUSTICE BOTTOMRY, ANGSTMAN, ADAIR and CASTRES concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE HARRISON

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

This is an appeal by the plaintiffs from an order granting a motion for change of venue entered in the district court of the fourth judicial district, Missoula County.

Service of summons and complaint was made upon defen- • dants in the County of Missoula. On defendant Puyear’s application the court granted a change of venue to Ravalli County. Plaintiffs appealed from the order and defendant Puyear has confessed the error of the court and consents that the order may be reversed. Since it appears that Missoula County is a proper county for the trial of this case, the cause is remanded to the district court with instructions to annul and vacate the order granting the motion and to make and enter an order denying the same. Remittitur to issue forthwith.

MR. JUSTICE BOTTOMRY, ANGSTMAN, ADAIR and CASTRES concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

353 P.2d 99, 137 Mont. 526, 1960 Mont. LEXIS 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dietzman-v-sharbono-mont-1960.