Court Opinion

ID: 9632840
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 11:26:04.954665+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:08:23.142364
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE SHEA
specially concurring:
*223I concur in the opinion of the Court, with the exception that I would permit the plaintiffs to use the property for a substantially longer time than until December 31, 1987.
The only evidence in the record on the length of time the plaintiffs should be permitted to stay on the premises, was presented by the plaintiffs, and the evidence presented was 50 years. After the trial court made its decision, plaintiffs moved the trial court to amend its findings and conclusions to permit the 50 years, but the trial court refused to so amend the findings and conclusions.
I do not say that 50 years must be the figure, but there is no evidence in the record for the trial court’s decision to permit the plaintiffs to stay on the land until only December 31, 1987. I do not, however, deem it proper for an appellate court to set the number of years; that is the function of the trial court.
I would affirm the trial court in all respects except that I would remand for a determination of the number of years the plaintiffs should be permitted to stay on the land, based on the evidence in the record. That evidence supports a decision far beyond December 31, 1987.
This case is a prime example of what Corporate America through its activities in the State of Montana is doing to the citizens. It demonstrates the difference between ownership of land owned by residents of Montana and ownership of land owned by outside corporations who use this state as an economic playground.
MR. JUSTICE HARRISON concurs.