State v. Scrivani Helehan

Montana Supreme Court

State v. Scrivani Helehan

Montana Supreme Court·Decided November 19, 1976·No. 13554·Published

Opinion

No. 13554

I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O MONTANA F F

19 76

THE STATE OF MONTANA, ACTING BY AND T R U H THE DEPARTMENT O HOG F HIGHWAYS O THE STATE O MONTANA, F F

P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t ,

KATHERINE SCRIVANI, e t a l ,

Defendant and Respondent.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING :

Counsel o f Record:

For Appellant:

D a n i e l J. S u l l i v a n a r g u e d , Helena, Montana

For Respondent :

S t i m a t z and Engel, B u t t e , Montana Joseph C. Engel 1 1 a r g u e d , B u t t e , Montana 1

Submitted: October 25, 1976

Decided : N O v 19 1976 Mr. C h i e f J u s t i c e James T . H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n o f t h e Court.

I n t h i s c a u s e d e f e n d a n t Thomas J . H e l e h a n ' s p r o p e r t y

i n t e r e s t w a s condemned by p l a i n t i f f and p o s s e s s i o n t a k e n i n

O c t o b e r , 1965. I n J u n e , 1976, d e f e n d a n t was awarded $30,866

by a condemnation commission and judgment was e n t e r e d f o r t h a t

amount p l u s i n t e r e s t and c o s t s , making a t o t a l judgment o f

$87,742.04. P l a i n t i f f s o u g h t t o have t h e judgment amended

but w a s refused. Counsel f o r d e f e n d a n t t h e n moved t h e c o u r t

t o o r d e r p l a i n t i f f t o make a d e p o s i t i n t o c o u r t o f t h e amount

o f t h e award and judgment, which w a s g r a n t e d by t h e d i s t r i c t

court. P l a i n t i f f f i l e d n o t i c e o f a p p e a l and a p p l i e d f o r a s t a y

upon f i l i n g a s u p e r s e d e a s bond. T h i s was d e n i e d by t h e d i s t r i c t

c o u r t and p l a i n t i f f w a s a g a i n o r d e r e d t o make t h e d e p o s i t .

P l a i n t i f f t h e n , e x p a r t e , s e c u r e d from t h i s C o u r t a n

order staying the d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s order. D e f e n d a n t moved f o r

a n a d v e r s a r y h e a r i n g which was g r a n t e d . Such h e a r i n g was h e l d ,

b r i e f s f i l e d by t h e p a r t i e s and c o u n s e l w e r e h e a r d i n o r a l a r g u -

ment and t h e m a t t e r s u b m i t t e d f o r d e c i s i o n .

While many c o n t e n t i o n s a r e made by p l a i n t i f f t h a t t h e

s t a y o r d e r should remain i n e f f e c t , w e a r e confronted w i t h t h e

s t a t u t e , s e c t i o n 93-9920, R.C.M. 1 9 4 7 , which p r o v i d e s i n p e r t i n e n t

part:

"At a n y t i m e a f t e r t h e f i l i n g o f t h e p r e l i m i n a r y condemnation o r d e r o r a f t e r t h e r e p o r t and a s s e s s - ment o f t h e c o m m i s s i o n e r s have been made and f i l e d i n t h e c o u r t , and e i t h e r b e f o r e o r a f t e r a p p e a l from s u c h a s s e s s m e n t , o r from a n y o t h e r o r d e r o r judgment i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s , t h e c o u r t o r a n y j u d g e t h e r e o f a t chambers, upon a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e p l a i n - t i f f , s h a l l have power t o make a n o r d e r t h a t upon payment i n t o c o u r t f o r t h e d e f e n d a n t e n t i t l e d t h e r e - t o o f t h e amount o f c o m p e n s a t i o n c l a i m e d by t h e d e f e n d a n t i n h i s answer o r t h e amount a s s e s s e d , e i t h e r by t h e c o m m i s s i o n e r s o r by t h e j u r y , a s t h e c a s e may b e , t h e p l a i n t i f f b e a u t h o r i z e d , i f a l r e a d y i n possession of t h e property of such defendant s o u g h t t o b e a p p r o p r i a t e d , t o c o n t i n u e i n s u c h pos- session; o r , i f not i n possession, t h a t the p l a i n t i f f be a u t h o r i z e d t o t a k e p o s s e s s i o n of s u c h p r o p e r t y and u s e and p o s s e s s t h e same d u r i n g t h e pendency and u n t i l t h e f i n a l c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s and l i t i g a t i o n , and t h a t a l l a c t i o n s and proceed- i n g s a g a i n s t t h e p l a i n t i f f on a c c o u n t t h e r e o f be s t a y e d u n t i l such t i m e * * *.

" * * * t h e defendant e n t i t l e d t h e r e t o , i f t h e r e be no d i s p u t e a s t o t h e ownership of t h e p r o p e r t y , may a t any t i m e demand and r e c e i v e upon o r d e r of t h e c o u r t , a l l o r any p a r t of t h e money s o d e p o s i t e d * * * " * * * and p r o v i d e d , f u r t h e r , t h a t t h e c o u r t s h a l l n o t o r d e r t h e d e l i v e r y t o any d e f e n d a n t of more t h a n s e v e n t y - f i v e ( 7 5 ) p e r c e n t of t h e money d e - p o s i t e d on h i s a c c o u n t e x c e p t upon p o s t i n g of bond by such d e f e n d a n t e q u a l t o t h e amount i n e x c e s s o f s e v e n t y - f i v e ( 7 5 ) p e r c e n t , w i t h s u r e t i e s t o be approved by t h e c o u r t ; t o r e p a y t o t h e p l a i n t i f f such amounts withdrawn a s a r e i n e x c e s s of h i s f i n a l award i n t h e p r o c e e d i n g s . "

T h i s Court i n S t a t e v. Bradshaw Land & L i v e s t o c k Co., 99

Mont. 95, 1 0 3 , 43 P.2d 674, i n r e f e r r i n g t o t h i s s e c t i o n o f o u r

Codes, s t a t e d :

"By t h e s e s t a t u t e s t h e p l a i n t i f f s a r e a c c o r d e d t h e r i g h t of a p p e a l t o t h i s c o u r t . They m u s t , i n o r d e r t o g a i n p o s s e s s i o n , pay t h e amount of t h e compensation and damages awarded i n t o c o u r t . I f t h e y do n o t pay t h e amount of t h e judgment w i t h i n t h i r t y d a y s , and a showing of nonpayment i s made, t h e t r i a l c o u r t must s e t a s i d e t h e e n t i r e p r o c e e d i n g s and r e s t o r e p o s s e s s i o n . No method i s p r o v i d e d f o r a s t a y of p r o c e e d i n g s pending a n a p p e a l ; i n f a c t , t h e s t a t u t e e x p r e s s l y d e c l a r e s t h a t none of t h e p r o c e e d i n g s p r o v i d e d f o r by s t a t u t e s h a l l o p e r a t e a s a s t a y of proceed- ings. I t i s e x p r e s s l y provided t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f s , by payment i n t o c o u r t of t h e amount a s s e s s e d , ' s h a l l n o t be t h e r e b y p r e v e n t e d o r p r e c l u d e d from a p p e a l - i n g from such a s s e s s m e n t , b u t may a p p e a l i n t h e same manner and w i t h t h e same e f f e c t a s i f no money had been d e p o s i t e d o r s e c u r i t y g i v e n . ' These s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s , i f v a l i d , a r e c o n c l u s i v e of t h e r i g h t of t h e p l a i n t i f f s t o appeal."

The Department of Highways c o n t e n d s t h a t s e c t i o n 93-9917,

R.C.M. 1947, i s a u t h o r i t y f o r a s t a y o f t h e judgment, w h i l e de-

f e n d a n t c a l l s a t t e n t i o n t o s e c t i o n 9 3 - 9 9 0 5 ( 3 ) , R.C.M. 1947, which

provides i n part:

" * * * Such a p p e a l d o e s n o t s t a y any f u r t h e r p r o c e e d i n g s under t h i s c h a p t e r , e x c e p t t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t on motion o r ex p a r t e may g r a n t a s t a y f o r s u c h p e r i o d of t i m e and under such c o n d i t i o n s a s t h e c o u r t deems p r o p e r . "

A s h e r e t o f o r e s t a t e d t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t denied a s t a y t o t h e

Department of Highways.

T h i s a p p a r e n t c o n f l i c t was r e c o g n i z e d by t h i s C o u r t

i n Robertson v. S t a t e Highway Comm'n, 148 Mont. 275, 281, 282,

420 P.2d 2 1 , where w e s t a t e d :

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