The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1943-10-29
REPORT OF WORK
IN SUPREME
COURT FOR Week
DECISIONS:

DECISIONS:
October 18th-lra L. jackson " w
r. Mcdonald, and others. Appealed
from Glacier county, Cut Bank. I'm
animous opinion of the court prepared
by Justice Albert Anderson.
Held: Where Jackson and McDon
aid both claimed to be the purchaser
of certain horses, it was held that
Jackson, who got delivery of the
horses from the seller, was entitled
to recover the horses which were
held by the sheriff under claim and
delivery action instituted by Melon
aid. 1t was further held that the
| judgment be affirmed as to the award
of damages against McDonld but that
| it must be modified TO the extent
that no damages could be recovered
from the sheriff
October 18th-Maude X. Maring v.
The City of Billings. Appealed from
Yellowstone county, Billings Major
ity opinion by Justice c. F. Morris.
Chief Justice Howard A. Johnson con-
CURED in the result Justices Left
Erickson and Hugh Adair dissented.
Held: Where the plaintiff brought
suit against the City of Billings claim
ing damages as a result of personal
injury from falling into an excavation
in the parking of one of the city
streets, it was held that the district
court was correct in sustaining a de-
murrer to the complaint since the
complaint disclosed that the plain
tiff's own negligence was the proxi-
mate cause of her injuries.
October 21st-Thomas &. Carey v.
State Liquor Control Board and 9TH
ers. An original proceeding in the
supreme court asking for a declara-
tory judgment. Opinion of the court
prepared by Chief Justice Howard
A. Johnson. Justices Albert Ander-
son and Claude F. Morris concurred.
Held: It held valid a contract by
the Montana Liquor Board for the
purchase of $4,000 cases of liquor and
the state treasurer to pay a
draft for $150,O00 issued by the board
as a partial payment of SO per case
for the liquor. the validity of which
had been questioned by the treasurer.
The court also upheld as valid both
the liquor boards rationing system
and it's policy of buying for sale to
purchasers liquors which
for any lawful reason would not have
been otherwise available for purchase
and sale by the board to the general
public.
In this instance the board through |
q misunderstanding of the law, had |
believed that down payment out of
it's own funds would have been I'M
lawful; it therefore allowed the mon
sy for the down payment to be fur
1ished by the 1877 licensed dealers
able and willing to do so. and their
was deposited with the state
treasurer, and the boards $150,O00
lraft was issued for the necessary
Town payment
This was done with the understand
ng that the liquor when received
would be sold only to those who had
furnished the down payment of $40
Ter case for which they would be en-
tiled to credit
The court found that such agree
nent would not be unlawful if under
he law the liquor board could not
otherwise have made the purchase.
,ut the court also held that since ,
he board could lawfully have made
he purchase, using it's own money,
. had made the agreement with the {
callers on account of mistake of
aw, and suggested that an action
hould be brough by the board to
etermine whether the contract with
he dealers should be rescinded and
he liquor made available to the gen
raj public as well as TO the approx :
lately 800 licensed liquor dealers
tho had been unable or unwilling to
dvance the $40 per case.
October 22nd = Otto r. Detert v.
larry F. Detert. Appealed from Lake
ounty, Poison. Opinion of the court
repaired by Justice Left Erickson.
ustice Hugh r. Adair dissented.
Held: In an action for divorce be-
veen Otto and Mary Detert it was "
cid that the evidence was sufficient /,
, sustain the trial courts judgment !
lat there was extreme cruelty on the
art of Otto Detert as against his Z
ife Mary Detert, and that she be 3
-anted divorce together with a Z
iyment of $4,000 in lieu of her dover 3
gifts. g
Prepared and released by: z
PETER MELOY, Marshal