Court Opinion

ID: 9507594
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:24:11.098573+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:21.297926
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE MORRISON,
specially concurs as follows:
I concur in the result but would like to add these *445comments.
My dissenting opinion filed in 79 Ranch, Inc. v. Pitsch (1981), Mont., 631 P.2d 690, 38 St.Rep. 1048, accurately sets forth my views in this matter. However, upon remand to the District Court, findings of fact were made with respect to reasonable diligence and those findings bind me in reviewing this appeal.
There is evidence in the record which would support a finding of reasonable diligence by Pitsch's predecessor-in-interest,but I am unable to say that the trial court abused its discretion in finding lack of diligence. Therefore, I must vote to affirm though, had I been the trial judge, reasonable diligence would have been found and the Pitsch right therefore would date from 1973 and would be exercised pursuant to filing.