Habel v. James
Montana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Rice
¶ 1 Appellants Ray J. Habel and Habel, Bowd, & Habel, a partnership (Habel) appeal from the order of the Eleventh Judicial District Court, Flathead County, in favor of Respondents Barton James and Carol James (Jameses), determining that Jameses acquired a prescriptive easement on the Habel property for a dock and retaining wall. We affirm.
¶2 The issue on appeal is whether the District Court erred in ruling, as a matter of law, that a non-possessory prescriptive easement existed for the dock and retaining wall, and not a possessory adverse possession of property enclosed by the dock and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hyde v. LawsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1972
- Lindgren v. MartinIdaho Supreme Court · 1997
- Brumit v. LewisMontana Supreme Court · 2002
- Burlingame v. MarjerrisonMontana Supreme Court · 1983
- Swecker v. DornMontana Supreme Court · 1979
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Payne v. KnutsonMontana Supreme Court · 2004
- Hidden Hollow Ranch v. FieldsMontana Supreme Court · 2004
- Hallenberg v. General Mills Operations, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 2006
- Apecella v. OvermanMontana Supreme Court · 2025
- Frank v. HustonMontana Supreme Court · 2008