State v. Scrivani Helehan

Montana Supreme Court

State v. Scrivani Helehan

DecidedNovember 19, 1976

Docket13554

StatusPublished

This text of State v. Scrivani Helehan (State v. Scrivani Helehan) 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. Scrivani Helehan, (Mo. 1976).

Pincite

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