Legal Opinion

Espy v. Quinlan

Montana Supreme Court

Decided July 18, 2000No. 00-043PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Trieweiler

¶1 The Plaintiff, Hugh Espy, commenced this action in the District Court for the Sixteenth Judicial District in Rosebud County and alleged that the Defendants, Joe and Joan Quinlan, interfered with his ditch easement. The Defendants filed a counterclaim in which they alleged interference with their road easement. Joe Quinlan was subsequently dismissed from the action. The District Court entered judgment for Espy on his claim and for Joan Quinlan on her counterclaim. The District Court ordered Quinlan to pay Espy’s attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to § 70-17-112(5), MCA. Quinlan appeals the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Carbon County v. Union Reserve Coal Co., Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Daines v. KnightMontana Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Engel v. GamppMontana Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Kuhlman v. RiveraMontana Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Knudsen v. TaylorMontana Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Mularoni v. BingMontana Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Byrum v. AndrenMontana Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Musselshell Ranch Co. v. Seidel-JoukovaMontana Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Burton v. AdamsMontana Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Dolan v. GuentherMontana Supreme Court · 2026

2 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