Tarlton v. Kaufman
Montana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Leaphart
¶1 Robert Tarlton and Mary Tarlton (collectively “the Tarltons”) appeal from the judgment entered on a jury verdict in the Fourth Judicial District Court, Missoula County, which found that a fence covered in dark material and approximately 26 feet in height installed by James Kaufman and Gretchen Kim Kaufman (collectively “the Kaufmans”) was not a nuisance or a spite fence. We reverse in part and affirm in part.
¶2 We address the following issues on appeal, restated as follows:
¶3 I. Did the District Court err by instructing the jury that “[gjenerally, a structure or condition cannot constitute…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Kiely Construction, L.L.C. v. City of Red Lodge Ex Rel. Red Lodge City CouncilMontana Supreme Court · 2002
- Venuto v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1971
- Northfield Insurance v. Montana Ass'n of CountiesMontana Supreme Court · 2000
- McJunkin v. Kaufman & Broad Home Systems, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1987
- Murphy Homes, Inc. v. MullerMontana Supreme Court · 2007
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- United National Insurance v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 2009
- Peterson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. DethmanMontana Supreme Court · 2010
- Mark Spotted Horse v. BNSF RailwayMontana Supreme Court · 2015
- Teeter v. Mid-Century Insurance Co.Montana Supreme Court · 2017
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.