The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-04-13
A DECISION RENDERED
Judge Woody Straightens Out
the Theater Lien Case.
MANY INTRICATE POINTS
The Court las Had the Matter Under
Consideration Since Last December.
Document a Lengthy One and
Shows Careful Study.

Judge Woody Of Missoula yesterday
occupied the bench in the district court
for a time n rendered his decision in
the Anaconda Theater Association lien
cases. The cases are three in number
that of F. s. Leck against the Anaconda
Theater association; Smelling & Price
VS.. the Anaconda Theater association
and F. s. Leck, jointly. and the Ana
conda Copper Mining company against
Smelling & Price +. s. Leck.
The trial of the case was held during
the December term of the district court,
at which time Judge Woody presided.
The case was tried without a jury, and
lasted several days. At the conclusion
of the testimony Judge Woody took the
matter under advisement for so days,
and carried of to Missoula with him
the plans, specifications, bills, lists Of
material, the voluminous evidence and
other papers pertaining to the case.
When the go days had expired Judge
was not yet ready, and by consent of
the attorneys the judge took until
Nav /.
The decision is one OF the most
lengthy and carefully prepared papers
ever brought into court. 1t covers
oOo u ShSCtS u ClOSc tyDcWIllltH
copy and its reading took up nearly an
hour. The findings of fact and conclu-
siOns OF law show exhaustive study and
research. The case Is one in which
many intricate points of law are in
volved. but Judge Woody's decision
straightens out the tangle in a clear and
lucid amer. The case is OF more than
usual interest to the business men and
citizens of Anaconda, and 1t attracted
considerable attention at the time of the
trial.
The length of the decision precludes
its publication in full. but the follow
ing synopsis will serve to explain the
complicated points witt which Judge
Woody has had to deal:
The cases are taken up in successive
order, the first one being that of +. S.
Leck against the Anaconda theater as
ISOLATION, in which the court says:
From the ~pleadings and evidence in
this case the court finds the following
facts:
That the plaintiff liz on the 29th day
of September, 1896, enter into a written
contract with the defendant, to furnish
all necessary material and perform all
the necessary labor for the proper anG
complete construction of a certain the
alter building for the defendant accord
ing to the plans and specifications, ex-
cept in so far as the same should be
specifically modified. n to complete
the said building and deliver the same
to the defendant on or before Dec. Is,
1896 (weather alone ~preventing), free
and clear of any and all claims, de-
mands of liens Of material men, arti-
sans or laborers, and to execute the
penal bond in the sum of s., 1000, condi
lions for the faithful n full perror-
a of all the terms and conditions
of said agreement; and that the defen-
dant in consideration of the covenant
promises and agreement contained in
said agreement, to be fully Kept and
performed by the said plaintiff, prom
Used and agreed to pay to said plaintiff
the sum of $1S,370, the final payment
being Is per cent of said sum-, TO oe
made when said building should be
completed n received from said
plaintiff. after proper inspection and
approval by the architect.
the plans and specifications
were delivered to said plaintiff except
two pages of specifications claimed to
have been numbered 2S and 29, which
were never delivered to him; that the
plaintiff purchased the necessary mate
rial and employed the necessary labor
ers and mechanics. n proceeded to
said building, but he has not
completed the same according to the
terms of said agreement.
That the plaintiff has only paid a por-
ton of the purchase price of the ma
asNu IA it liz uCtlon vi Sdlu |
building, and that there now exists
claims against said building for the
purchase price of the materials used
in the construction thereof, exceeding
$40, 900.
That said building has never been
inspected, approved n received by
architect or his representative.
That the plaintiff has filed a lien
said theater building n the lots
Of ground upon which the same is stu
ated in the sun of $14, S63. 80, to secure
the payment of a portion of the origi-
contract price and for extra ma
terials and labor alleged to have been
and performed on said build
ing.
That the plaintiff has allowed five
other liens. amounting in the aggregate
to the sum of sic. 663. SO, to be filed
the theater building, and that
liens are also included by the
in his liens filed against the
said property.
That the plaintiff furnished extra ma
and made changes in the con-
value of $sIS.
That the defendant has paid to the
as a portion of the contract
price $40. 2O9. so.
That the defendant in paying the
PLAINTIFFS employees overpaid them
leaving the actual amount paid
% the plaintiff $40. 209. go.
That the court further finds that the
contract price and extras to
the plaintiff would be entitled IL
10 liens were filed is s1e, 1ss; that the
of $40. 209. go leaves a balance