Legal Opinion · Dissent

Formicove, Inc. v. Burlington Northern, Inc.

Montana Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 1983No. 83-143Published

1DissentJustice Weber

I dissent from the majority holding that LeMunyon and case law consistent with that 1921 opinion misconstrue Section 69-4-240, MCA. Nothing in the statutory language nor the legislative history indicates that the Montana legislature intended to hold railroads to a higher duty of care in managing surface water than the duty imposed on other property owners.

“An uphill property owner owes no duty to his downhill neighbor to prevent the encroachment of such vagrant or surface waters from his property onto his neighbor’s. LeMunyon v. Gallatin Valley Ry . Co., 60 Mont. 517, 199 P. 915. This…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Montana Horse Products Co. v. Great Northern Railway Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Roope v. Anaconda Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1972
  3. State v. CatesMontana Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Cox v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  5. Le Munyon v. Gallatin Valley Railway Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1921

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