Title: HOWARD v STATE
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 80-488
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: June 24, 1982

No. 80-488 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1982 IVAN HOWARD, Plaintiff and Respondent, STATE OF MONTANA, Department of Military Affairs, Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from: District Court of the First Judicial District, In and for the County of Broadwater Honorable Peter Meloy, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Denny Moreen argued and Daniel J. Hoven argued, Assistant Attorneys General, Helena, Montana For Respondent : Patrick F. Hooks and Tom Budewitz argued, Townsend, Montana Filed: JUN 2 4 1982 Submitted: March 2, 1982 Decided: 3q Mr. J u s t i c e John Conway Harrison d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. T h i s appeal r e s u l t s from an a c t i o n by a d e v e l o p e r , I v a n Howard, a g a i n s t t h e S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t of M i l i t a r y A f f a i r s ( h e r e i n a f t e r t h e S t a t e ) f o r i n v e r s e condemnation. Following a j u r y v e r d i c t f o r t h e S t a t e i n t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , B r o a d w a t e r C o u n t y , t h e t r i a l c o u r t g r a n t e d Howard's motion f o r a new t r i a l . The S t a t e a p p e a l s . T h i s d i s p u t e i n v o l v e s 183 a c r e s i n t h e Limestone H i l l s a r e a southwest of Townsend, Montana. The land was owned by sheep r a n c h e r s , t h e Toma f a m i l y , from t h e 1920s u n t i l 1978. I n 1978 Robert Bateman and Ivan Howard pur- chased t h e l a n d , made up of e l e v e n p a t e n t e d mining c l a i m s , f o r $20B an a c r e . Before completing t h e s a l e , Howard and Bateman v i s i t e d t h e p r o p e r t y t h r e e t i m e s and ordered a t i t l e commitment from S u r e t y T i t l e Company of Helena. From 1958 u n t i l 1971, t h e N a t i o n a l Guard conducted two- t o four-week annual t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s i n t h e Limestone H i l l s a r e a , which involved t h e use of a r t i l l e r y s h e l l s and o t h e r weapons. From 1971 t o t h e p r e s e n t , t h e same land h a s been used f o r weekend t r a i n i n g froin s p r i n g u n t i l f a l l of each year. Throughout t h i s time, t h e National Guard h a s o p e r a t e d w i t h a s p e c i a l use permit from t h e Bureau of Land Management and t h e S t a t e of Montana, which own t h e land surrounding t h e mining claims. The c u r r e n t permit w i l l e x p i r e i n 1983. Bateman and Howard were unaware of t h e N a t i o n a l Guard's presence. N e i t h e r t h e Tornas nor t h e t i t l e commit- ment mentioned t h e problem. The National Guard's presence was common knowledge i n t h e Townsend a r e a , but Howard and Bateman d i d not d i s c u s s t h e s a l e with l o c a l r e a l t o r s o r o t h e r c i t i z e n s . The Toina-Howard c o n t r a c t was consurnmated on March 27, 1978. Howard p l a n n e d t o s u b d i v i d e t h e 1 8 3 a c r e s i n t o r e c r e - a t i o n a l h o m e s i t e a r e a s and s e l l i t f o r $500 an a c r e . I n e a r l y May, Howard p u t a g e n e r a l ad f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l l a n d i n t h e I n d e p e n d e n t Record and r e c e i v e d n i n e t e e n r e s p o n s e s . On May 6 , Howard p l a n n e d t o meet p r o s p e c t i v e b u y e r s a t t h e " h o m e s i t e s " b u t was s t o p p e d by r o a d b l o c k s e r e c t e d by t h e N a t i o n a l Guard. T h i s was when Howard f i r s t became a w a r e o f t h e N a t i o n a l G u a r d ' s p r e s e n c e . S u b s e q u e n t l y , Howard s o l d one l o t f o r $58B an a c r e t o a buyer who l i k e d t o watch h o w i t z e r s . iioward abandoned any f u r t h e r a t t e m p t s t o s e l l t h e p r o p e r t y , however, and f i l e d s u i t a g a i n s t t h e S t a t e f o r i n v e r s e condemnation. The j u r y found i n f a v o r o f t h e S t a t e . Howard f i l e d a motion f o r a new t r i a l , which was g r a n t e d . The S t a t e a p p e a l s . The f i r s t i s s u e r a i s e d on a p p e a l is whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n d e f i n i n g " t a k i n g " a s " a c t u a l i n t e r - f e r e n c e w i t h u s e o f t h e p r o p e r t y . " J u r y I n s t r u c t i o n No. 1 3 , proposed by Howard and a d o p t e d by t h e t r i a l c o u r t , d e f i n e s " t a k i n g " a s " a c t u a l i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t h e u s e o f t h e p r o p e r t y . " The S t a t e ' s proposed d e f i n i t i o n o f " t a k i n g ," which t h e c o u r t r e f u s e d , is " a c t u a l i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h o r d i s t u r b a n c e o f p r o p e r t y r i g h t s . " I n v i e w o f o u r h o l d i n g h e r e i n t h a t Howard pur- c h a s e d t h e l a n d a f t e r its i n v e r s e c o n d e m n a t i o n , t h e d i s t i n c - t i o n is n o t c r u c i a l t o t h i s c a s e . Using Howard's t h e o r y of i n v e r s e c o n d e m n a t i o n , t h e " i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t k ~ use" o c c u r r e d i n 1978, a s t h e m i l i t a r y manuevers d i d n o t i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e l a n d u n t i l it was d e v e l o p e d i n 1978. Thus, t h e damages awarded, i f a n y , would b e d e t e r m i n e d by .the 1978 p r o p e r t y v a l u e . F u r t h e r , t h e S t a t e ' s a f f i r m a t i v e d e f e n s e s o f p r e s c r i p t i v e e a s e m e n t , l a c h e s , and s t a t u t e o f l i m i t a t i o n s would b e i n a p p l i c a b l e . I n c o n t r a s t , under t h e S t a t e ' s t h e o r y , a " t a k i n g " would o c c u r whenever t h e r e was a c t u a l i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h p r o p e r t y r i g h t s . Thus, t h e " t a k i n g , " i f a n y , o c c u r r e d when t h e m i l i t a r y manuevers began i n 1958. The manuevers, e v e n i f t h e l a n d was unused, i n t e r f e r e d w i t h t h e r i g h t t o u s e t h e p r o p e r t y . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e damage, i f a n y , would be d e t e r m i n e d by t h e 1 9 5 8 p r o p e r t y v a l u e s and t h e S t a t e ' s a f f i r m a t i v e d e f e n s e s c o u l d be g i v e n . W e h o l d f o r t h e S t a t e . Howard r e l i e s on T h o r n b u r g v . P o r t o f P o r t l a n d ( 1 9 6 2 ) , 233 Or. 1 7 8 , 376 P.2d 1 0 0 , t o s u p p o r t h i s " u s e " t h e o r y . Thornburg was a landowner n e a r t h e P o r t l a n d a i r p o r t who s u e d f o r e x t r e m e n o i s e . B u t , Thornburg is e a s i l y d i s - t i n g u i s h e d . The Oregon C o n s t i t u t i o n p r o v i d e s t h a t " [ p ] r i v a t e p r o p e r t y s h a l l n o t be t a k e n f o r p u b l i c u s e . . . w i t h o u t j u s t c o m p e n s a t i o n . . . I' A r t . I , Sec. 1 8 , Oregon C o n s t i t u - t i o n . The Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n , i n c o n t r a s t , p r o v i d e s t h a t " [ p l r i v a t e p r o p e r t y s h a l l n o t be t a k e n o r damaged f o r p u b l i c u s e w i t h o u t j u s t c o m p e n s a t i o n . . ." (Emphasis added.) A r t . 11, Sec. 29, 1972 Mont. C o n s t . ; c f . Rauser v. T o s t o n I r r i g a - t i o n D i s t r i c t ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 1 7 2 Mont. 538, 565 P.2d 632. The more r e s t r i c t i v e Oregon C o n s t i t u t i o n r e q u i r e d t h e c o u r t t o a d o p t a n u i s a n c e t h e o r y i n o r d e r t o compensate Thornburg. To do t h i s , t h e Oregon c o u r t d i s c u s s e s a c t u a l i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t h e u s e o f p r o p e r t y and i g n o r e s t h e t r e s p a s s r e q u i r e m e n t . Thornburg a l s o i n v o l v e d a c h a n g i n g i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h p r o p e r t y r i g h t s . The o r i g i n a l p r o p e l l e r p l a n e s were n o t n e a r l y a s n o i s y a s t h e j e t s t h a t m o t i v a t e d T h o r n b u r g ' s s u i t . The i n s t a n t c a s e is s i m i l a r t o Atwater v. U n i t e d S t a t e s ( 1 9 4 6 ) , 106 C t . C 1 . 1 9 6 , where tile p l a i n t i f f ' s l a n d k i d s used from 1941-1944 a s a s a f e t y zone f o r an a d j o i n i n g g u n n e r y r a n g e . P l a i n t i f f had n e v e r u s e d , o c c u p i e d o r r e n t e d t h e l a n d and r e c e i v e d no income from t h e p r o p e r t y a l t h o u g l i i t was used o c c a s i o n a l l y f o r h u n t i n g d u c k s . The c o u r t found t h a t t h e u s e o f t h e l a n d a s t h e s a f e t y z o n e , which was p a t r o l l e d , c o n s t i t u t e d a t a k i n g . The " t a k i n g " was t h e i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t h e r i g h t t o u s e t h e p r o p e r t y , n o t t h e a c t u a l u s e . See a l s o : S t a t e ex r e l . Symms v. Nelson Sand and G r a v e l , I n c . ( 1 9 7 0 ) , 93 I d a . 574, 468 P.2d 306, 311; L i n c o l n Loan Company v. S t a t e Highway Commission ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 274 O r . 49, 545 P.2d 1 0 5 , 108. A t w a t e r p a r a l l e l s t h e i n s t a n t c a s e . The mining clairils, a l t h o u g h used o n l y f o r g r a z i n g u n t i l 1978, were f i r s t " t a k e n " ( i f e v e r t a k e n ) f o r m i l i t a r y u s e i n 1958, when t h e N a t i o n a l Guard f i r s t i n t e r f e r e d w i t h t h e o w n e r ' s r i g h t t o u s e t h e l a n d . I t f o l l o w s t h a t i f t h e " t a k i n g " o c c u r r e d i n 1958, t h e t r i a l c o u r t s h o u l d have g i v e n i n s t r u c t i o n s on p r e s c r i p t i v e e a s e m e n t s , s t a t u t e s o f l i m i t a t i o n s and l a c h e s . The c a s e is c o n t r o l l e d by t h e f a c t t h a t Howard p u r c h a s e d t h i s l a n d a f t e r i n v e r s e condemnation o c c u r r e d . H e was, t h e r e f o r e , p r e c l u d e d from c l a i m i n g damages f o r i n v e r s e condemnation. Knight v . C i t y o f B i l l i n g s ( 1 9 8 2 ) , Mont. , 642 P.2d 1 4 1 , 39 St.Rep. 385; W i l l i a m s v. C i t y o f V a l d e z ( A l a s k a 1 9 8 1 ) , 624 P.2d 802. I t is, t h e r e f o r e , u n n e c e s s a r y f o r u s t o c o n s i d e r t h e i s s u e of whether t h e c o u r t a b u s e d i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n g r a n t i n g a new t r i a l . The o r d e r o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t g r a n t i n g a new t r i a l is r e v e r s e d and t h e j u r y v e r d i c t r e i n s t a t e d . W e c o n c u r : , . ' \-- 7 , j u s t i c e s I