Court Opinion

ID: 9793410
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:47:09.828713+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:04:50.641887
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE ANGSTMAN
concurring specially:
I concur in what is said in the foregoing opinion, but I think to be consistent the court should overrule the majority opinion in Seibel v. Byers, 136 Mont. 39, 344 Pac. (2d) 129.
There is necessarily implied in the holding in the Seibel ease that a judgment is not divisible so that this court may consider the question of liability in a tort action separate and apart from the question of damages.
I think the court was wrong in that case, as I pointed out in my dissenting opinion therein. It seems to me now that the court is considering the two issues separately and as if they may be divided for separate consideration, contrary to the majority opinion in the Seibel case.