State v. Higgins

Montana Supreme Court

State v. Higgins

DecidedJanuary 23, 1975

Docket12812

StatusPublished

This text of State v. Higgins (State v. Higgins) 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

State v. Higgins, (Mo. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

No. 12812

I N WE SUPREME C U T O THE STATE OF M N A A OR F OTN

THE STATE O MONTANA, ACTING BY F AND THROUGH T E DEPARTMENT O HIGHWAYS H F O T E STATE O MONTANA, F H F

P l a i n t i f f and Respondent,

CHARLES C. HIGGINS and MARJORIE K. HIGGINS, husband and w i f e ,

Defendants and Appellants.

Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Eleventh J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable Robert K e l l e r , Judge p r e s i d i n g .

Counsel of Record :

For Appellants :

L e i f Erickson, S r . , argued, Helena, Montana

For Respondent :

Daniel J. S u l l i v a n and James R. Beck argued, Helena, Montana

---

Submitted: November 21, 1974

Decided : JAR 2 3 1975 Mr. J u s t i c e Frank I. Haswell d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e C o u r t .

C h a r l e s and t l a r j o r i e Higgins a p p e a l from a p r e l i m i n a r y o r d e r of condemnation e n t e r e d i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t of L i n c o l n

County. The o r d e r d e t e r m i n e s t h a t t h e u s e t o which t h e Department

of Highways s e e k s t o a p p l y t h e H i g g i n s ' p r o p e r t y i s a n e c e s s a r y

p u b l i c u s e a u t h o r i z e d by law, and t h a t t h e t a k i n g i s r e q u i r e d by the public i n t e r e s t .

The a c t i o n began w i t h a c o m p l a i n t f i l e d by t h e Department of Highways on J u l y 26, 1972, s e e k i n g t o condemn a right-of-way

t h r o u g h p r o p e r t y owned by t h e H i g g i n s i n t h e Yaak R i v e r V a l l e y

of n o r t h w e s t e r n Montana. A t t a c h e d t o t h e c o m p l a i n t was a res-

o l u t i o n of t h e S t a t e Highway Commission which a s s e r t e d : That

p u b l i c i n t e r e s t and n e c e s s i t y r e q u i r e d t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a s t a t e highway i n L i n c o l n County; t h a t a highway had been p l a n n e d

and l o c a t e d i n a manner most c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e g r e a t e s t p u b l i c

good and l e a s t p r i v a t e i n j u r y ; t h a t a p o r t i o n of p r o p e r t y owned

by t h e H i g g i n s was n e c e s s a r y f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h a t highway;

and t h a t t h e Department had been u n a b l e t o n e g o t i a t e a n a g r e e -

ment f o r p u r c h a s e of t h e p r o p e r t y . The owners, C h a r l e s and

M a r j o r i e H i g g i n s , f i l e d an answer d e n y i n g t h e m a t e r i a l a l l e g a -

t i o n s of t h e c o m p l a i n t and c l a i m i n g t h a t $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 would be a

r e a s o n a b l e and j u s t compensation f o r t h e t a k i n g .

A h e a r i n g was h e l d on October 11, 1973, t o d e t e r m i n e

t h e " n e c e s s i t y " o f t h e proposed condemnation. The Department i n -

t r o d u c e d t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e S t a t e Highway Commission and t h e n r e s t e d , r e l y i n g on t h e p r e s u m p t i o n s a r i s i n g from t h e r e s o l u t i o n by v i r t u e o f t h e p r o v i s i o n s of s e c t i o n 32-3904, R.C.M. 1947. The p r o p e r t y owners c a l l e d H i g g i n s a s t h e i r o n l y w i t n e s s . H e r e l a t e d h i s p r e s e n t and a n t i c i p a t e d u s e s of t h e p r o p e r t y and

t h e a d v e r s e impact which t h e proposed condemnation and c o n s t r u c - t i o n would have on t h o s e u s e s . T e s t i f y i n g a s one e x p e r i e n c e d i n r e a l e s t a t e t r a n s a c t i o n s but u n q u a l i f i e d a s an engineer, he

e x p r e s s e d a b e l i e f t h a t t h e proposed highway c o u l d be c o n s t r u c t e d

more e c o n o m i c a l l y on t h e e a s t s i d e of t h e v a l l e y , a c r o s s t h e r i v e r from h i s p r o p e r t y .

On c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n h e a d m i t t e d t h a t c o n s t r u c t i n g t h e

highway on t h e o t h e r s i d e of t h e r i v e r would n e c e s s i t a t e t h e

u s e of a d d i t i o n a l b r i d g e s . H e expressed a personal opinion t h a t

t h e a d d i t i o n a l c o s t of c o n s t r u c t i n g t h e s e b r i d g e s might be o f f -

s e t by t h e r e d u c t i o n i n c u t t i n g and f i l l i n g a r i s i n g from t h e

e a s t s i d e ' s less rugged t e r r a i n . Even i f t h e a l t e r n a t e r o u t e wa s was most c o s t l y , h e f e l t t h e added e x p e n s e / w a r r a n t e d by t h e

l e s s e n e d demand f o r p r i v a t e l a n d . Most of t h e l a n d on t h e e a s t

s i d e of t h e r i v e r i s owned by t h e f e d e r a l government, w h i l e

much of t h e l a n d on t h e w e s t s i d e o f t h e v a l l e y i s p r i v a t e l y

owned. On c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n , he p r o f e s s e d no knowledge of whether o r n o t t h e f e d e r a l government would a l l o w c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h i s

highway on i t s l a n d .

When t h e p r o p e r t y owners r e s t e d t h e Department reopened

i t s c a s e by c a l l i n g John D i l l o n , d i s t r i c t r a n g e r f o r t h e Yaak

Ranger D i s t r i c t of t h e Kootenai N a t i o n a l F o r e s t . He t e s t i f i e d

t h a t he was opposed t o c o n s t r u c t i o n of a highway o n f e d e r a l

f o r e s t l a n d s i n t h e Yaak R i v e r V a l l e y . He had responded t o t h e

D e p a r t m e n t ' s i n q u i r i e s by opposing a r o u t e on t h e e a s t s i d e of

t h e r i v e r f o r t h r e e reasons: F i r s t , he was opposed t o d e d i c a t i o n

of a d d i t i o n a l f o r e s t l a n d f o r a highway when one a l r e a d y e x i s t e d

on t h e w e s t s i d e of t h e r i v e r ; s e c o n d , t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n would

have a n a d v e r s e impact on t h e Yaak R i v e r " w a t e r i n f l u e n c e zone"; and f i n a l l y , a highway on t h e e a s t s i d e of t h e r i v e r would i n t e r - f e r e w i t h moose and mule d e e r m i g r a t i o n p a t t e r n s . D i l l o n a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t h i s o p i n i o n had been c o n c u r r e d

i n by h i s immediate s u p e r v i s o r , b u t t h a t h e d i d n o t know whether t h e Department had pursued t h e i n q u i r y t o h i g h e r l e v e l s w i t h i n

t h e f e d e r a l bureaucracy. Under c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n he a l s o ad-

m i t t e d t h a t t h e p r i m a r y u s e r s of t h e p r e s e n t highway were l o g g e r s ,

h u n t e r s , and f i s h e r m e n and t h a t t h e proposed highway would be

used s i m i l a r l y .

Following t h e h e a r i n g t h e p r e l i m i n a r y o r d e r of condem- n a t i o n was i s s u e d and t h i s a p p e a l w a s s u b s e q u e n t l y p e r f e c t e d .

A p p e l l a n t s h e r e a r g u e t h a t a highway r o u t i n g o v e r p u b l i c l a n d

s h o u l d be p r e f e r r e d t o a l o c a t i o n on p r i v a t e l a n d . They c o n t e n d

t h a t " n e c e s s i t y " h a s n o t been d e m o n s t r a t e d u n t i l it i s shown

t h a t t h e f e d e r a l l a n d i s u n a v a i l a b l e f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h i s

highway. I t i s c l a i m e d t h a t t h e u n a v a i l a b i l i t y of f o r e s t l a n d s

h e r e c o u l d n o t be e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h o u t a showing t h a t t h e r e q u e s t s

were pursued t o t h e h i g h e r l e v e l s of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s F o r e s t

Service.

The Department, on t h e o t h e r hand, a r g u e s t h a t t h e o n l y

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