The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1894-04-03
sY THE SUPREME COURT.
Four Interesting Decisions Handed Down
In Helena Yesterday.

In Helena Yesterday.
Special Dispatch 70 IN, S!andtrl.
HELENA. April 2.-Supreme court opin-
ions were handed down to-day as follows:
Edward Carron, respondent, VS.. Thomas
Clark ct al, appellants; appeal from
Mlssoula. This action was brought to en-.
join the defendants from opening a road
through certain field in possession OF
the plaintiff as lessee, and TO recover
damages for the removal of a part of the
fence. The defendants moved for q nom
suit on the ground Of lack Of proof to es-
tablsh certain material allega.
tions OF the complaint. Tho mo-
ton was overruled, which is
assigned rs an error. One OF the prin-
cipal allegations OF Carron was that no
affidavit was filed OF the posting Of the
notices as required by law. On this point
the court says: Negligence on the part
of the proper officials to have filed and
recorded the proper records in such
matter is ccnsurable aud punishable.
And while II may be that the manner OF
keeping the records in tho office of the
county clerk merits severe censure. still
It would not he conformable TO reason or
well-established principles OF law to
declare void certain proceedings FOR open.
ing tho road because the required affi.
davit showing the posting Of certain
notices was not among the files or records
of the proper office, IL in fact the required
notices were posted.n Another conten-
tion was that the amount of damage re-
resulting from tearing down the fence
was not specified. This omission, the
court says, is an example of the loose
ness with which the plcadings are drawn.
On these points the non-suit should have
been granted. The cause is rcmanded
with direction 10 reverse the judgment.
Opinion by Justice Harwood.
James s. Casey. plaintiff and respon-
dent. VS.. John Wright, defendant appel
LIANT, appeal from Custer county, an action
TO cancel and set aside tax deed which
the plaintiff alleges is cloud on his title
| to real estate in Miles City. lie claimed
tha; the assessment of property and its
sale for delinquent taxes for 1883 was in-
valid because 1t was assessed aud sold in
bulk for the gross amount OF the taxes
due for that year on the lots
| in controversy and other lots in differ
ent blocks, but did not ailege
that the taxes were unjust or unequal, or
| that any offer was made 10 pay the amount
| for which the property was legally
chargeable. The defendant demurred to
the complaint for these reasons. The
court overruled the demurrer. The SUI
preme court holds that this was an error.
| The supreme court further holds that the
sale OF the property in controversy
with other property all together for the
| gross sum of taxes assessed upon the
! whole was void. aud that the tax deed was
void. The Judgment is reversed, with in
structions to sustain the demurrer TO the
complaint and for further proceedings in
accordance with tho views expressed in
tho opinion of the court. Opinion by Chief
Justice Pemberton.
Thomas Il. Stevenson, respondent, VS..
+. T.. Caldwell, appellant; appeal from
Gallatin county. A motion to dismiss ap-
peal on the ground thar IL was not died
within the time allowed was granted. IL
Was case appealed 10 the district court
from Justices court, and one In which
the appellant was entitled TO a jury trial
and there was no jury in attendance until
thc day the case was docketed. The SUI
preme court says the respondent was
therefore In no way injured. The action
of the district court is reversed and the
case remanded with instructions TO deny
the motion to dismiss the appeal. opin.
ion by Justice Dewitt.