Legal Opinion

Sinclair v. Big Bud Manufacturing Co.

Montana Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1993No. 93-275PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gray

This case involves the application of Rule 41(e), M.R.Civ.P., which provides that an action shall not be farther prosecuted unless summons is issued within one year of its commencement. We reverse the District Court’s refusal to grant a motion to dismiss filed by Big Bud Industries, Inc., Meissner Brothers Partnership, Meissner Tractors, Inc., Joe Meissner, Paul Meissner, Big Bud Tractors, Inc., and Ron Harmon (collectively referred to as the non-BBMC defendants), holding that they were entitled to dismissal under Rule 41(e), M.R.Civ.P.

Daniel Sinclair (Sinclair) formed the first of many…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Steer, Inc. v. Department of RevenueMontana Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Sooy v. Petrolane Steel Gas, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Livingston v. Treasure CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Sink v. SquireMontana Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Courchane v. KuntzMontana Supreme Court · 1990

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Haugen v. Blaine Bank of MontanaMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Hadford v. Credit Bureau of Havre, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Busch v. AtkinsonMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Eddleman v. Aetna Life InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1998
  5. MacPheat v. SchaufMontana Supreme Court · 1998

13 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