Legal Opinion

Benintendi v. Hein

Montana Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 2011No. DA 11-0234PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Cotter

¶1 Jesse and Tera Hein rented a house from Julia Benintendi and Joey and Sarah Perkerewicz (hereinafter B&P). B&P alleged the Heins caused considerable damage to the property when they vacated the premises. The Heins countered that B&P unlawfully retained their security deposit and refused to reimburse the Heins for home and lawn improvements. B&P sued and obtained a default judgment. Subsequently, the District Court set aside the default judgment and held a jury trial. B&P were awarded damages but not attorney fees or costs. They appeal. We affirm in part and reverse and remand in part.

ISSUES

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Stanley v. LemireMontana Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Essex Insurance v. Moose's Saloon, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Plath v. SchonrockMontana Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Blume v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Hughes v. AhlgrenMontana Supreme Court · 2011

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Ditton v. Department of Justice Motor Vehicle DivisionMontana Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Johnson Farms, Inc. v. HallandMontana Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Musselshell Ranch Co. v. Seidel-JoukovaMontana Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Carter v. Badrock RFDMontana Supreme Court · 2021
  5. Williamson v. Montana Public Service CommissionMontana Supreme Court · 2012

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API