Legal Opinion

Brinkman & Lenon, Architects & Engineers v. P & D Land Enterprises

Montana Supreme Court

Decided February 1, 1994No. 93-346PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gray

In this case, we conclude that the District Court erred in granting summary judgment to plaintiff Brinkman & Lenon because plaintiff failed to meet its initial burden of establishing the absence of genuine issues of material fact. Therefore, we reverse and remand.

The facts necessary to our resolution of this case are straightforward. Brinkman and Lenon, Architects and Engineers (Brinkman), entered into a standard form architectural contract with P&D Land Enterprises (P&D) on May 21,1990. Pursuant to the contract, Brink-man was to perform certain architectural and engineering services in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Minnie v. City of RoundupMontana Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Traders State Bank of Poplar v. MannMontana Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Scott v. RobsonMontana Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Mathews v. Glacier General Assurance Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1979

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Mead v. M.S.B., Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Carelli v. HallMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  3. FSR Brokerage, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  4. Bowen v. McDonaldMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Estate of Nielsen v. PardisMontana Supreme Court · 1994

15 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