MADISON FORK RANCH v L B LODGE P
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 79-38 I N THE SUIJREP.:E COURL!' OF THE STATE OE' MONTAI\!A 1980 P l a i n t i f f a n d Respondent., -vsL & B LODGE PPOE TIMBER PRODUCTS, D e f e n d a n t s anci A p p e l l a n t - s . Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court. o f t h e E i g h t e e n t k ! J u l i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f c r t h e County o f G a l - l a t i n , The Honora.ble W. W. Less1 e y , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . Counscl o f R e c o r l : B o l i n g e r , H i g g i n s 6 Andes, Bozeman, Montana B. A. P o l g i n g e r ~ r g u e d ,Bozeman, MontanE. For Respondent : B e r ~ ,Morgan, C o i l & S t c k e s , Bclzemar:, Montena Gregory 0. Morgan a r g u e d , Bozeman, Montana Filed: _ilk& * ; t. 4 - - I%?'J - Clerk Mr. Chief J u s t i c e Frank I . Court. Haswell d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e P laintiff-respondent M a d i s o n F o r k Ranch ( R a n c h ) f i l e d a complaint against defendants a l l e g i n g a breach o f c o n t r a c t i n t i m b e r c u t t i n g o p e r a t i o n s on t h e R a n c h and s e e k i n g r e s c i s s i o n o f t h e c o n t r a c t and a n i n j u n c t i o n . The D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o u n d a b r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t and i s s u e d a permanent i n j u n c t i o n p r o h i b i t i n g d e f e n d a n t s f r o m c u t t i n g a n y t i m b e r on t h e R a n c h , findings, but i t s c o n c l u s i o n s and j u d g m e n t w e r e s i l e n t on t h e i s s u e o f rescission of the contract. D e f e n d a n t L & B Lodge P o l e T i m b e r Products appeals. T h e R a n c h i s a d u d e r a n c h p r i v a t e l y owned b y a p a r t n e r s h i p o f f i v e n o n r e s i d e n t i n d i v i d u a l s and i s l o c a t e d n e a r t h e t o w n o f West Y e l l o w s t o n e . The R a n c h i s o p e r a t e d p u r e l y f o r t h e l e i s u r e i n t e r e s t s o f i t s o w n e r s a l t h o u g h i t d o e s a c c o m m o d a t e some g u e s t s . It i s not operated t o r e t u r n a p r o f i t . formed i n the e a r l y 1970's. T h e p a r t n e r s h i p was A t t h a t t i m e a f i c t i t i o u s name c e r - t i f i c a t e was f i l e d w h i c h l i s t e d t h e o r i g i n a l p a r t n e r s . since t h a t time, Tweedy, two o r i g i n a l partners, However, D o n a l d Dodge and J o h n have purchased t h e i n t e r e s t o f t h r e e o f t h e o t h e r o r i g i - nal partners. occurred. No o t h e r p a r t n e r s h i p o w n e r s h i p c h a n g e s h a v e A new f i c t i t i o u s name c e r t i f i c a t e was f i l e d p r i o r t o t r i a l b u t a f t e r commencement o f t h e a c t i o n . The owners and R o l a n d B r o n d e r , t h e Ranch foreman, became c o n c e r n e d a b o u t M o u n t a i n P i n e B e e t l e i n f e s t a t i o n o f t i m b e r on t h e Ranch i n e a r l y 1978. a t t h a t time. B r o n d e r was a u t h o r i z e d t o h i r e a l o g g e r He c o n t a c t e d L & B L o d g e P o l e T i m b e r P r o d u c t s t h r o u g h R o b e r t H. Smith. L & B Lodge P o l e T i m b e r P r o d u c t s i s o w n e d a n d o p e r a t e d b y R o b e r t S m i t h and L u c i l l e S m i t h and w i l l be r e f e r r e d t o as " S m i t h . " T h e R a n c h and S m i t h e n t e r e d i n t o a n o r a l c o n t r a c t a b o u t J u n e 1, 1 9 7 8 , l o g the property i n August, and e x e c u t e d a w r i t t e n c o n t r a c t t o 1978. D o n a l d Dodge s t a t e d t h a t t h e R a n c h ' s p u r p o s e i n e n t e r i n g i n t o t h e o r a l c o n t r a c t was t o - 2 - r e d u c e t h e f i r e h a z a r d as w e l l as p r e s e r v e t h e a e s t h e t i c and f u t u r e economic v a l u e o f t h e p r o p e r t y . Dodge a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e c o n t r a c t was s e t a t $ 1 0 p e r t h o u s a n d , price, w e l l below t h e market t o a l l o w Smith t o p r o f i t a b l y s e l e c t i v e - c u t the property. T h e R a n c h ' s p u r p o s e i n e x e c u t i n g t h e w r i t t e n c o n t r a c t was t o accommodate S m i t h i n a c q u i r i n g f i n a n c i n g f o r l o g g i n g equipment. T h e l o g g i n g o p e r a t i o n commenced i n l a t e May, 1978, and c o n t i n u e d t h r o u g h t h e summer w i t h B r o n d e r p r e s e n t m o s t o f t h e time. Bronder, i n supervising the operation, advised Smith n o t t o c u t s t a n d s o f f i r o r a s p e n and t o l d h i m t o l e a v e o t h e r s p e c i f i c s e c t i o n s o f t r e e s and i n d i v i d u a l t r e e s f o r t h e i r a e s t h e t i c value. Dodge t e s t i f i e d t h a t S m i t h was s a t i s f a c t o r i l y p e r f o r m i n g t h e c o n t r a c t b y s e l e c t i v e - c u t t i ng p r i o r t o t h e e x e c u t i o n o f the written contract. I n July, 1978, Smith discussed w i t h Bronder t h e purchase o f a "harvester" t o complete t h e logging operation. A harvester i s a l a r g e m a c h i n e w h i c h i s m a n e u v e r e d t h r o u g h t h e woods f e l l i n g i n d i v i d u a l t r e e s and r e m o v i n g t h e l i m b s . Smith t e s t i f i e d t h a t B r o n d e r t h o u g h t t h e h a r v e s t e r was a g o o d i d e a s i n c e he was c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e s c a r s l e f t b y t h e c a t e r p i l l a r t h a t S m i t h was using, and t h i s p r o b l e m w o u l d s u p p o s e d l y be e l i m i n a t e d b y u s i n g the rubber-tired harvester. Bronder agreed t o present t h e c o n t r a c t t o t h e p a r t n e r s i f S m i t h w o u l d have i t d r a f t e d . Mr. S m i t h h a d h i s a t t o r n e y d r a f t t h e c o n t r a c t and i t was s i g n e d b y S m i t h and M a r g a r e t Grand, a p a r t n e r i n t h e Ranch, o n A u g u s t 1, 1978. T h e l o g g i n g o p e r a t i o n c h a n g e d c o n s i d e r a b l y when S m i t h began u s i n g t h e h a r v e s t e r . T h e r e s u l t was t h a t many m o r e t r e e s w e r e r e m o v e d o r k n o c k e d down a f t e r t h e w r i t t e n c o n t r a c t was d r a f t e d and s i g n e d . This effect i s attributed to the character and s i z e o f t h e h a r v e s t e r . The f o l l o w i n g c o n t r a c t p r o v i s i o n i s t h e c e n t e r o f cont r o v e r s y i n t h i s case: "That t h e p a r t y o f t h e f i r s t p a r t agrees t o s e l l t o t h e p a r t y o f t h e second p a r t a l l merchantable t i m b e r on s a i d l a n d s w h i c h h a s b e e n o r now i s i n f e c t e d b y t h e p i n e b e e t l e , and t h e p a r t y o f t h e s e c o n d p a r t a g r e e s t o c u t and r e m o v e a l l o f s a i d m e r c h a n t a b l e t i m b e r f r o m s a i d l a n d s on o r before , 1 9 .'I .. S m i t h t e s t i f i e d t h a t he u n d e r s t o o d t h e m e a n i n g o f " i n f e c t e d m e r c h a n t a b l e t i m b e r " t o mean a1 1 t r e e s s u s c e p t i b l e t o i n f e s t a t i o n by t h e b e e t l e s i n c e t h e y would d i e e v e n t u a l l y . stated t h a t the verbal He agreement which p r e d a t e d t h e w r i t t e n agreement gave h i m t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Pursuant t o t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n S m i t h b e l i e v e d he c o u l d t a k e a1 l t r e e s w h i c h w e r e seven inches i n diameter o r l a r g e r a t chest height. Smith also t e s t i f i e d t h a t B r o n d e r t o l d h i m t h a t he w a n t e d t h e f i r e h a z a r d r e m o v e d e n t i r e l y and t h e t r e e s s a l v a g e d t h a t c o u l d be s a l v a g e d . S m i t h s a i d i t was a g r e e d t h a t he w o u l d t a k e a l l t r e e s t h a t w o u l d be h i t b y t h e b e e t l e s , a l t h o u g h B r o n d e r t o l d h i m on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s n o t t o t a k e c e r t a i n t r e e s because o f t h e i r a e s t h e t i c v a l ue. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , S m i t h t e s t i f i e d t h a t he was s e l e c t i v e - c u t t i n g down t o s e v e n i n c h c h e s t h i g h t r e e s and l e a v i n g s t a n d s o f f i r and a s p e n . Bronder d i d not appear a t t r i a l . On S e p t e m b e r 6 , 1978, t h e Ranch n o t i f i e d S m i t h t h a t t h e y c o n s i d e r e d t h e c o n t r a c t t e r m i n a t e d as a r e s u l t o f h i s f a i l u r e t o p e r f o r m according t o i t s terms. A c o m p l a i n t was f i l e d S e p t e m b e r 11, 1 9 7 8 , and a t e m p o r a r y r e s t r a i n i n g o r d e r was i s s u e d o n O c t o b e r 2, 10, 1978, 1978. A show c a u s e h e a r i n g was h e l d and o n O c t o b e r t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t " r e l e a s e d and v a c a t e d " t h e t e m p o r a r y r e s t r a i n i n g order. S m i t h r e - e n t e r e d t h e p r o p e r t y about O c t o b e r 19, 1978, l o g g e d 1 5 t o 25 m o r e a c r e s b e f o r e D e c e m b e r 5 , 1978. and He was p r e - v e n t e d f r o m any f u r t h e r l o g g i n g o f t h e p r o p e r t y i n t h e s p r i n g o f 1979, b y Roland Bronder. S m i t h ' s m o t i o n s f o r d i s m i s s a l and summary j u d g m e n t b a s e d on t h e Ranch's f a i l u r e t o f i l e a new f i c t i t i o u s name c e r t i f i c a t e were b o t h denied. T h e t r i a l was h e l d J u n e 1, 1 9 7 9 . Several expert witnesses t e s t i f i e d as t o t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e c o n t r a c t and t h e o p e r a t i o n conducted by Smith. One o f t h e e x p e r t s , M c K n i g h t , c r u i s e d t h e t i m b e r on t h e R a n c h . Robert M c K n i g h t h a s a B.S. d e g r e e i n s c i e n c e and f o r e s t r y w i t h 1 3 1 k y e a r s e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t i m b e r and f o r e s t r y c o m p a n i e s i n s o u t h w e s t e r n M o n t a n a and 2 5 years experience i n cruising timber. He d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e r e was an a v e r a g e o f 1 5 3 t r e e s p e r a c r e c o n s i s t i n g o f 75 m e r c h a n t a b l e t r e e s p e r acre, 43 were i n f e c t e d . He d e f i n e d m e r c h a n t a b l e as e i g h t inches i n diameter a t b r e a s t h e i g h t . He a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t m o s t o f t h e a r e a s l o g g e d b y S m i t h on t h e Ranch w e r e c l e a r c u t and t h a t t h e m a r k e t p r i c e f o r a c l e a r - c u t operation i n the summer o f 1 9 7 8 was a t l e a s t $ 5 0 p e r t h o u s a n d . Dodge had a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t a f t e r the execution of the w r i t t e n contract, o p e r a t i o n became a c l e a r - c u t the operation. W i l l i a m D r i v e r , t h e t i m b e r s a l e s and d i s e a s e c o n t r o l spec i a l i s t f o r t h e G a l l a t i n and C u s t e r F o r e s t , McKnight, testified, t h a t t h e c o n t r a c t was a s e l e c t i v e - c u t as d i d c o n t r a c t on a p e r t r e e basis. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t e n t e r e d f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w on J u n e 1 9 , 1 9 7 9 . The c o u r t f o u n d , i n pertinent part: ... " That t h e purpose f o r which t h e p l a i n t i f f e n t e r e d i n t o t h i s a g r e e m e n t was t o r e d u c e t h e f i r e h a z a r d t o t h e p l a i n t i f f ' s b u i l d i n g s and lands, along w i t h the personnel r e s i d i n g t h e r e o n , as w e l l as p r e s e r v e t h e a e s t h e t i c and f u t u r e economic v a l u e s o f t h e p r o p e r t y f r o m t h e pine beetle; " T h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t s h a v e f a i l e d and r e f u s e d t o p e r f o r m c e r t a i n o b l i g a t i o n s under t h e c o n t r a c t i n t h a t t h e y have c u t t r e e s w h i c h a r e n o t m e r c h a n t a b l e and h a v e c u t m e r c h a n t a b l e t r e e s w h i c h a r e n o t i n f e c t e d o r w e r e n o t i n f e c t e d by t h e pine beetle; t h a t the defendants, i n t h e i r l o g g i n g o p e r a t i o n s , h a v e w a s t e d and d e s t r o y e d many o f t h e y o u n g , g r e e n , n o n i n f e c t e d t r e e s s t a n d i n g on t h e p r o p e r t y and w i l l , u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e r e s t r a i n e d by t h i s Court, c o n t i n u e t o w a s t e and d e s t r o y t h e y o u n g , g r e e n , u n i n f e c t e d t r e e s s t a n d i n g on t h e p r o p e r t y , w h i c h t r e e s a r e o f v a l u e t o t h e p l a i n t i f f f o r a e s t h e t i c and e c o nomic purposes." On t h e b a s i s o f t h e p r e c e d i n g f i n d i n g s , the D i s t r i c t Court c o n c l u d e d t h a t S m i t h had b r e a c h e d t h e c o n t r a c t , and t h a t s i n c e t h e d e s t r u c t i o n and t h e t h r e a t e n e d f u t u r e d e s t r u c t i o n t o t h e s t a n d i n g t i m b e r c o u l d n o t be r e m e d i e d b y a n a c t i o n a t l a w , an i n j u n c t i o n was p r o p e r . T h e j u d g m e n t and p e r m a n e n t i n j u n c t i o n was e n t e r e d o n J u n e 28, 1979. The i n j u n c t i o n p e r p e t u a l l y e n j o i n e d S m i t h f r o m e n t e r i n g t h e Ranch f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f c u t t i n g o r o t h e r w i s e d e s t r o y i n g a n y s t a n d i n g t i m b e r on t h e R a n c h . The c o u r t a l s o g r a n t e d t h e Ranch a l i e n upon a l l t i m b e r c u t b u t n o t decked on t h e i r land. The f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s a r e r a i s e d on a p p e a l : 1. Whether t h e d e f e n d a n t ' s a c t s i n c u t t i n g u n i n f e c t e d m e r c h a n t a b l e t r e e s and d e s t r o y i n g young, green, uninfected (unmerchantable) t r e e s c o n s t i t u t e d a breach o f c o n t r a c t ? 2. Whether t h e i n j u n c t i o n i s overbroad? 3. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n denying d e f e n d a n t ' s m o t i o n s f o r d i s m i s s a l and summary j u d g m e n t w h i c h w e r e b a s e d o n p l a i n t i f f ' s f a i l u r e t o f i l e a new f i c t i t i o u s name c e r t i f i c a t e p r i o r t o f i l i n g i t s complaint? 4. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n g r a n t i n g p l a i n t i f f a l i e n on t h e c u t , undecked l o g s ? I n addressing t h e breach o f c o n t r a c t issue, we n o t e t h a t many l e g a l d i s t i n c t i o n s h a v e b e e n d r a w n b y c o u r t s as t o t h e r i g h t s o f the parties t o a contract f o r the sale of timber. The d i s t i n c t i o n s a r e drawn d e p e n d i n g on w h e t h e r t h e i n s t r u m e n t i s a c o n t r a c t f o r s a l e o r a conveyance o f r e a l p r o p e r t y , contract i s oral or written, executory, whether t h e whether t h e c o n t r a c t i s executed o r o r w h e t h e r a mere r e v o c a b l e l i c e n s e has been conveyed o r t i t l e t o t h e t i m b e r i s passed. circumstances, D e p e n d i n g on t h e c o u r t s h a v e t r e a t e d t i m b e r a g r e e m e n t s as e i t h e r a contract f o r sale, a lease o f the land, an e m p l o y m e n t c o n t r a c t , a l i c e n s e t o c u t t i m b e r o r a conveyance passing t i t l e t o t h e grantee. 5 4 C.J.S. Logs and L o g g i n g 99. To date, t h i s Court h a s d e c l a r e d t h a t an o r a l o r s i m p l e c o n t r a c t f o r t h e s a l e o f t i m b e r i s a mere l i c e n s e r e v o c a b l e a t t h e w i l l o f t h e vendor. S o r e n s e n v. Jacobson (1951), G u l l i c k s e n v. 125 Mont.148, Shadoan ( 1 9 5 0 ) , 1 2 4 Mont. that a written, 56, 2 3 2 P.2d 332. 2 1 8 P.2d In 714, we h e l d u n r e c o r d e d c o n t r a c t f o r t h e s a l e o f t i m b e r was i n e f f e c t i v e t o b i n d a s u b s e q u e n t p u r c h a s e r o f t h e l a n d who d i d n o t have n o t i c e . I n dicta, i t was s t a t e d t h a t t h e p r e s e n c e o r a b s e n c e o f n o t i c e was i r r e l e v a n t s i n c e t h e c o n t r a c t was e x e c u t o r y and w o u l d n o t p r e v e n t a u n i l a t e r a l r e v o c a t i o n o f t h e l i c e n s e . P e g g v. P.2d M i d - S t a t e D e v e l o p m e n t Corp. 1399, (1974), 164 Mont. 525, 529 expressly overruled t h i s dicta i n Gullicksen i n holding t h a t a w r i t t e n contract f o r the sale of timber i s enforceable a g a i n s t a subsequent purchaser w i t h n o t i c e o f t h e contract. However, t h e case i s d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m t h e p r e s e n t case i n t h a t t h e c o n t r a c t p u r p o r t e d t o convey t i t l e t o a l l m e r c h a n t a b l e t i m b e r and n o b r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t was i n v o l v e d . No Montana cases have addressed t h e i s s u e o f b r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t by h a r v e s t i n g timber which i s not the proper subject o f t h e contract. B o t h p a r t i e s t r e a t t h e i n s t r u m e n t as a c o n t r a c t f o r t h e s a l e o f t i m b e r r a t h e r t h a n a conveyance o f an i n t e r e s t i n l a n d . We a g r e e w i t h t h i s a p p r o a c h and p r o c e e d a c c o r d i n g l y . A t trial a p p e l l a n t d e v o t e d much e f f o r t t o s h o w i n g t h a t t h e b e s t management p r a c t i c e t o c o n t r o l t h e s p r e a d o f t h e p i n e b e e t l e i s t o remove a l l s u s c e p t i b l e t r e e s . He a r g u e s t h a t t h i s e s t a b l i s h e s a " u s a g e o f t r a d e " w h i c h i s t o be g i v e n e f f e c t i n c o n s t r u i n g t h e c o n t r a c t u n d e r t h e U n i f o r m C o m m e r c i a1 C o d e , t i o n 30-2-208, MCA. However, s e c t i o n 30-2-107(1), sec- MCA, establishes t h a t a contract f o r the sale of timber i s subject t o t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e U C C o n l y i f i t i s t o be " s e v e r e d b y t h e seller". Thus, t h i s contract i s not subject t o the provisions o f t h e UCC a n d o u r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e a g r e e m e n t i s d e p e n d e n t o n common l a w c o n s t r u c t i o n r u l e s . D e v e l o p m e n t Corp., supra, Any l a n g u a g e i n P e g g v. Mid-State which i n f e r s t h a t t h i s contract w i t h i n t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e UCC i s o v e r r u l e d . is A s we s t a t e d i n D a n i e l s o n v. 55, 58, 5 6 0 P.2d 893, 894, Danielson (1977), "It i s c l e a r 172 Mont. from Montana cases t h a t where t h e language o f a w r i t t e n c o n t r a c t i s c l e a r and unam- biguous there i s nothing f o r the court t o construe; t h e c o u r t i s simply t o apply t h e language as w r i t t e n t o t h e f a c t s o f t h e case, and d e c i d e t h e c a s e t h e duty of accordingly." a p p e l l a n t c o n t e n d s t h a t an a m b i g u i t y i s The created i n the contract s i n c e i t c a n be c o n s t r u e d b y t h e use o f t h e a d j e c t i v e " i n f e c t e d " t o m o d i f y t h e word " l a n d s " o r t o m o d i f y t h e word " t i m b e r . " cannot agree. states sell The s e n t e n c e i n q u e s t i o n . . . all m e r c h a n t a b l e t i m b e r on o r now i s i n f e c t e d b y t h e p i n e b e e t l e . "infected by the pine beetle," n o t s t r i k e and i n f e c t l a n d . and unambiguous; timber ... . . . agrees . ." T i m b e r may be the pine we f i n d t h e " a l l merchantable w h i c h -s-e e n - h a b - o r now i s i n f e c t e d b~ t h e p i n e b e e t l e " and a p p e l l a n t c o n t r a c t e d t o " c u t and r e m o v e . . ." b e e t l e does language c l e a r respondent contracted t o s e l l merchantable timber to s a i d l a n d s which has been however, Thus, " We a l l of said ( E m p h a s i s added.) S i n c e t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e c o n t r a c t i s c l e a r and unambiguous, t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s d u t y was " s i m p l y t o a p p l y t h e l a n g u a g e as w r i t t e n t o t h e f a c t s o f t h e c a s e , accordingly." D a n i e l son, supra. I n so d o i n g , and d e c i d e t h e case the D i s t r i c t Court found t h a t a p p e l l a n t breached t h e c o n t r a c t by c u t t i n g t r e e s which w e r e n o t " m e r c h a n t a b l e " and m e r c h a n t a b l e t r e e s w h i c h a r e n o t i n f e c t e d by t h e p i n e b e e t l e . With regard t o the standard o f review, t h i s C o u r t has r e p e a t e d l y s t a t e d i t w i l l n o t o v e r t u r n f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w i f s u p p o r t e d b y s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e and b y t h e law. When r e v i e w i n g e v i d e n c e i t w i l l be v i e w e d i n t h e 1 i g h t most f a v o r a b l e t o t h e p r e v a i l i n g p a r t y . (1977), therein. 172 Mont. 280, 284, 5 6 3 P.2d 5 3 8 , L u p p o l d v. 540-541, Lewis and c a s e s c i t e d The r e c o r d i n t h e p r e s e n t case r e v e a l s t h a t a p p e l l a n t f r e e l y a d m i t s t h a t he i s c u t t i n g a1 1 t r e e s 7 " o r g r e a t e r i n diameter a t chest h e i g h t regardless o f whether t h e i n d i v i d u a l t r e e has been o r i s i n f e c t e d . There i s a l s o s u b s t a n t i a l t e s t i - mony a n d p h o t o g r a p h i c e x h i b i t s w h i c h e s t a b l i s h t h a t t h e h a r v e s t e r h a s d e s t r o y e d many o f t h e s m a l l , young, green t r e e s which are not infected nor susceptible t o the pine beetle. e x p e r t and D o n a l d Dodge, Two w i t n e s s e s , an a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t a t l e a s t 90 a c r e s o f t h e Ranch have been c l e a r - c u t . On t h e b a s i s o f t h e s e f a c t s , viewed i n t h e l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e t o t h e p r e v a i l i n g p a r t y , when we f i n d substantial evidence t o support the D i s t r i c t Court's f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w . A p p e l l a n t a l s o argues t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s f a i l u r e t o s p e c i f i c a l l y s t a t e t h a t t h e defendant's c u t t i n g o f young green t r e e s and u n i n f e c t e d m e r c h a n t a b l e t r e e s was u n r e a s o n a b l e s u p p o r t s a c o n c l u s i o n o f no b r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t . I n l i g h t of the evidence a d d u c e d i n c l u d i n g a p p e l l a n t ' s a d m i s s i o n s and e x p e r t t e s t i m o n y t h a t 90 a c r e s was c l e a r - c u t , merit. we f i n d t h i s c o n t e n t i o n w i t h o u t The u n r e a s o n a b l e n e s s o f a p p e l l a n t ' s c o n d u c t i s n e c e s s a r i l y i m p l i e d i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s f i n d i n g s and c o n c l u s i o n and i s s u p p o r t e d b y s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e . judgment 410, 414, court's i s p r e s u m e d c o r r e c t and t h i s C o u r t w i l l d r a w e v e r y l e g i - t i m a t e i n f e r e n c e t o support t h a t presumption. M.R.Civ.P.; The t r i a l H a v r e I r r i g a t i o n Co. 3 1 8 P.2d 1076, 1078. v. R u l e 52, Majerus (1957), 1 3 2 Mont. On t h e r e c o r d b e f o r e u s t h e r e i s s u b s t a n t i a l evidence t o support "unreasonableness" as w e l l as a material breach of contract. A p p e l l a n t contends t h a t the D i s t r i c t Court erred i n enjoining a l l c u t t i n g instead o f merely enjoining the c u t t i n g of timber not included i n the contract. I t i s argued t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t s h o u l d be a l l o w e d t o c u t t h e m e r c h a n t a b l e i n f e c t e d t i m b e r on t h e R a n c h e v e n i f a b r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t i s found. It i s c o n t e n d e d t h a t t h i s c a s e f a l l s w i t h i n t h e r u l e t h a t an i n j u n c t i o n s h o u l d be l i m i t e d t o e n j o i n i n g t h e w r o n g a n d s h o u l d n o t e x t e n d t o p r e v e n t i n g l a w f u l a c t i v i t y under the c o n t r a c t . K a l i s p e l l Pee Wee B a s e b a l l L e a g u e ( 1 9 6 8 ) , 65, K a s a l a v. 1 5 1 Mont. i s c i t e d as a u t h o r i t y f o r t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n . 1 0 9 , 4 3 9 P.2d W note two general e tive relief. p r i n c i p l e s o f law related t o injunc- "An i n j u n c t i o n i s a w r i t f r a m e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e case commanding an a c t w h i c h t h e c o u r t r e g a r d s as e s s e n t i a l t o j u s t i c e , o r r e s t r a i n i n g an a c t w h i c h i t e s t e e m s c o n t r a r y t o e q u i t y and g o o d c o n s c i e n c e . " I n j u n c t i o n s 92. Ordinarily, 4 3 C.J.S. i n j u n c t i v e r e l i e f i s proper only i f an a c t has been done o r i s t h r e a t e n e d w h i c h w i l l p r o d u c e i r r e p a r a b l e i n j u r y t o t h e p a r t y a s k i n g f o r such r e l i e f , w h i c h r e s u l t i n a s e r i o u s change o f , and a c t s o r are destructive to, the p r o p e r t y a f f e c t e d e i t h e r physical l y o r i n t h e c h a r a c t e r i n which i t has been h e l d o r e n j o y e d , I n j u n c t i o n s 928. d o an i r r e p a r a b l e i n j u r y . 4 3 C.J.S. It i s a l s o w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t t h e g r a n t i n g o f an i n j u n c t i o n i s a m a t t e r o f d i s c r e t i o n r e s t i n g i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t and i t w i l l be s u s t a i n e d u n l e s s an a b u s e o f d i s c r e t i o n i s shown. (1969), 154 Mont. E r i e and M u l v i h i l l v. 1 5 0 , 4 6 1 P.2d S t a t e Hwy. Comm'n 207. T h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t c o n c l u d e d t h a t an i n j u n c t i o n was p r o p e r a f t e r finding t h a t "the standing timber i s part of the real property, t h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f which o r t h e threatened d e s t r u c t i o n o f which, c a n n o t be r e m e d i e d b y an a c t i o n a t l a w . " I n reaching t h i s c o n c l u s i o n t h e c o u r t c o n s i d e r e d t h e c h a r a c t e r and u s e o f t h e p r o p e r t y as w e l l as t h e c o n d u c t o f t h e a p p e l l a n t . The D i s t r i c t Court found instrumental the f a c t t h a t the property's p r i n c i p a l v a l u e o v e r t h e l a s t one h u n d r e d y e a r p e r i o d h a s b e e n " r e c r e a tional, a e s t h e t i c and e n v i r o n m e n t a l ." T h e c o u r t a1 s o s t a t e d t h a t " t h e p e r i o d necessary t o mature lodge pole p i n e i s i n excess o f s i x t y (60) years." The t h r e a t e n e d f u t u r e harm i s d e m o n s t r a t e d b y S m i t h r e - e n t e r i n g t h e l a n d t o c u t 15 t o 25 a d d i t i o n a l a c r e s a f t e r b e i n g n o t i f i e d t h a t t h e R a n c h c o n s i d e r e d h i m i n b r e a c h and t h e contract terminated. abuse o f d i s c r e t i o n . overbroad. U n d e r t h e s e f a c t s we do n o t f i n d a n N e i t h e r do we f i n d t h e i n j u n c t i o n On t h e b a s i s o f a p p e l l a n t ' s c o n d u c t i n r e - e n t e r i n g the land a f t e r a n o t i f i c a t i o n of termination, the D i s t r i c t Court was w a r r a n t e d i n e n j o i n i n g a l l f u t u r e c u t t i n g t o p r e v e n t f u t u r e i r r e p a r a b l e i n j u r y t o t h e Ranch. A p p e l l a n t s t r e n u o u s l y a r g u e s on a p p e a l t h a t r e s c i s s i o n i s n o t a p p r o p r i a t e i n t h i s case under s e c t i o n 28-2-1711, MCA. The t r i a l c o u r t c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e d e s t r u c t i o n o r t h r e a t e n e d d e s t r u c t i o n t o t h e t i m b e r c a n n o t be " r e m e d i e d b y an a c t i o n a t law." A l t h o u g h c o u r t s have f o u n d r e s c i s s i o n a t l a w ( a s d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m r e s c i s s i o n i n e q u i t y ) t o be an a p p r o p r i a t e r e m e d y when c o n f r o n t e d b y a m a t e r i a l contract, 324, s e e C r o f o o t L u m b e r v. 3 2 9 P.2d 302, breach o f a timber sales Thompson ( 1 9 5 8 ) , 1 6 3 C a l .App.Zd t h e area i s f a r from w e l l - s e t t l e d been addressed by t h i s Court. and has n o t H o w e v e r we n e e d n o t a d d r e s s t h i s i s s u e i n t h e p r e s e n t a p p e a l s i n c e t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t w i l l n o t be r e v e r s e d on a p p e a l f o r a c c e p t i n g t h e a p p e a l i n g p a r t i e s l e g a l theories at t r i a l . A p p e l l a n t next contends t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court erred i n d e n y i n g i t s m o t i o n s t o d i s m i s s and f o r summary j u d g m e n t w h i c h w e r e b a s e d o n M o n t a n a ' s f i c t i t i o u s name s t a t u t e s . Although the 1 9 7 9 l e g i s l a t u r e r e p e a l e d t h e f i c t i t i o u s name p r o v i s i o n s , f o l lowing statutes, a p p e a r i n g i n s e c t i o n 63-601, t h r o u g h s e c t i o n 63-603, R.C.M., 1947, R.C.M. the 1947 were i n e f f e c t t h r o u g h o u t t h e lower court proceedings: "63-601. F i c t i t i o u s name. Every partnership, other than a l i m i t e d partnership, transacting b u s i n e s s i n t h i s s t a t e u n d e r a f i c t i t i o u s name, o r a d e s i g n a t i o n n o t s h o w i n g t h e names o f t h e p e r s o n s i n t e r e s t e d as p a r t n e r s i n such b u s i n e s s , must f i l e w i t h t h e c l e r k o f t h e county i n which i t s p r i n c i p a l place o f business i s situated, a c e r t i f i c a t e , s t a t i n g t h e names i n f u l l o f a l l t h e members o f s u c h p a r t n e r s h i p a n d t h e i r p l a c e s o f r e s i d e n c e , and p u b l i s h t h e same o n c e a week, f o r f o u r s u c c e s s i v e weeks, i n a newspaper p u b l i s h e d i n t h e c o u n t y , i f t h e r e be o n e , and i f t h e r e be n o n e i n s u c h c o u n t y , t h e n i n a n e w s p a p e r p u b 1 i s h e d i n an a d j o i n i n g c o u n t y . "63-602. Certificate--when - - filed. t o be The c e r t i f i c a t e f i l e d w i t h t h e c l e r k , as p r o v i d e d i n t h e p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n , m u s t be s i g n e d b y t h e p a r t n e r s , a n d a c k n o w l e d g e d b e f o r e some o f f i c e r a u t h o r i z e d t o t a k e acknowledgment o f conveyances o f real property. Where t h e p a r t n e r s h i p i s h e r e a f t e r f o r m e d , t h e c e r t i f i c a t e m u s t be f i l e d and t h e p u b l i c a t i o n d e s i g n a t e d i n t h a t s e c t i o n m u s t be made w i t h i n o n e m o n t h a f t e r t h e f o r m a t i o n o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p , o r w i t h i n one month f r o m t h e t i m e designated i n t h e agreement o f i t s members f o r t h e commencement o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p ; where t h e p a r t n e r s h i p has been h e r e t o f o r e f o r m e d , t h e c e r t i f i c a t e m u s t be f i l e d and t h e p u b l i c a t i o n made w i t h i n s i x m o n t h s a f t e r t h e passage o f t h i s code. Persons doing business p a r t n e r s c o n t r a r y - -e p r o v i s i o n s --i s t o th of th c h a p t e r , - any a s s i g n s t h e r e o f , s h a l l - or n o t mai t a i n any a c t i o n u p o n - - a c c o u n t o f any o r on c o n t r a c t s ----- s a c t i o n s h a d i t h e i r made o r t r a n n a r t n e r s h i p name, i n a n y c o u r t o f t h i s s t a t e , { n t i l t h e y h a v e f i r s t f i l e d t h e c e m i c a t e an made t h e p u b 1 i c a t i o n h e r e i n r e q u i r e d . ( ~ m p h z added. ) -- "63-603. Change o f m e m b e r s h i p - - f i l i n g - new c e r tificate. On e v e r y c h a n g e o f t h e members o f a partnership, other than a limited partnership, t r a n s a c t i n g business i n t h i s s t a t e under a f i c t i t i o u s name, o r a d e s i g n a t i o n w h i c h d o e s n o t s h o w t h e names o f t h e p e r s o n s i n t e r e s t e d a s p a r t n e r s i n i t s b u s i n e s s , a new c e r t i f i c a t e m u s t b e f i l e d w i t h t h e c o u n t y c l e r k , and a new p u b l i c a t i o n made, as r e q u i r e d b y t h i s c h a p t e r , o n t h e f o r m a t i o n o f such p a r t n e r s h i p . " The M a d i s o n F o r k Ranch c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e p r e c e d i n g s t a t u t e i n 1 9 7 3 w h e n t h e p a r t n e r s h i p was f o r m e d . However, p r i o r t o t h e commencement o f t h i s a c t i o n t w o o r i g i n a l p a r t n e r s purchased t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h r e e o t h e r o r i g i n a l A new c e r t i f i c a t e was n o t f i l e d p r i o r t o t h i s s u i t . partners. The a p p e l l a n t ' s m o t i o n s t o d i s m i s s and f o r summary j u d g m e n t b a s e d o n n o n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e s e p r o v i s i o n s w e r e b o t h d e n i e d and t h e r e s p o n d e n t was g r a n t e d a c o n t i n u a n c e t o c o m p l y w i t h t h e provisions. T h e new c e r t i f i c a t e was f i l e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y o n e month p r i o r t o t r i a l . The c r i t i c a l m a i n t a i n any a c t i o n language i n the s t a t u t e s i s . . . until " t h e y have f i r s t f i l e d t h e c e r - t i f i c a t e a n d made t h e p u b l i c a t i o n h e r e i n r e q u i r e d " 63-602, R.C.M. 1947. . . . shal 1 i n section The c a s e s c o n s t r u i n g t h i s l a n g u a g e h a v e d i s t i n g u i s h e d b e t w e e n " m a i n t a i n " and "commence." Hatheway ( 1 9 1 2 ) , 46 Mont. 1, 11, 1 2 5 P. 4 1 7 , I n R e i l l y v. t h i s Court c o n s t r u e d t h i s s e c t i o n ' s p r e d e c e s s o r as f o l l o w s : "Without deciding whether the s t a t u t o r y provisions heretofore referred t o apply t o the p l a i n t i f f , i t i s s u f f i c i e n t t o h o l d , on t h e a u t h o r i t y o f C a r s o n - R a n d Co. v. S t e r n , 1 2 9 Mo. 3 8 1 , 3 2 L.R.A. 4 2 0 , 3 1 S.W. 7 7 2 , and N i c h o l s o n v . A u b u r n G o l d M i n . & M. Co., 6 C a l . A p p . 5 4 7 , 9 2 P . 6 5 1 , -a-i-i-n o t t h e r i g h t t o b e g i n a n th t t s action, but the r i g h t t o m a i n t a i n i t , t h a t i s w i t h h e l d x the s t a t u t e f o r f a i l u r e- o p f i o not w i t h i t s t e r m s ; and i f , b e f o r e t h e d e f e n s e i s i n t e r E e n e p l a i n t i f f complies w i t h the stat u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s , t h e a c t i o n may be m a i n t a i n e d . T h e d e f e n s e i s an a f f i r m a t i v e o n e and i s w a i v e d u n l e s s p l e a d e d i n t h e answer. ( V a u g h a n v. K u j a t h , 4 4 M o n t . 4 8 4 , 1 2 0 P. 1 1 2 1 ; C a l i f o r n i a S. & L. S o c i e t y v. H a r r i s , 111 C a l . 1 3 3 , 4 3 P. 525.) T h e a p p e l l a n t a l l e g e d t h a t he h a d c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e s t a t u t e , and, w h i l e t h i s a l l e g a t i o n was n o t n e c e s s a r y i n o r d e r t o s t a t e a c a u s e o f a c t i o n , i t was, n e v e r t h e l e s s , d e n i e d , a n d we t h i n k t h e d e n i a l was s u f f i c i e n t t o r a i s e t h e issue. B u t so l o n g as t h e s t a t u t e was c o m p l i e d w i t h by t h e appel l a n t b e f o r e t h e answer was i n t e r p o s e d , t h e a c t i o n s h o u l d n o t a b a t e . The r i g h t t o m a i n t a i n t h e a c t i o n simply sus ended u n t i l t h e s t a t u t e - c o m p l i e d w i t h . " is E m p h a s i s added.) P-I n Croft v. B a i n ( 1 9 1 4 ) , 49 Mont. 484, 489, 1 4 3 P. 960, we s a i d : "The d i s a b i l i t y imposed by s e c t i o n 5505 f o r f a i l u r e t o comply w i t h t h e r e q u i r e m e n t o f sect i o n 5 5 0 4 c a n n o t be o f a v a i l t o t h e d e f e n d a n t e x c e p t u p o n a f f i r m a t i v e a1 l e g a t i o n and p r o o f . I t i s i n t h e n a t u r e o f m a t t e r i n abatement. ( R e i l l y v. H a t h e w a y , 4 6 M o n t . 1, 1 2 5 P. 4 1 7 ; C a l i f o r n i a Sav. & L . Soc. v. H a r r i s , 111 C a l . 1 3 3 , 4 3 P. 5 2 5 . ) The i n h i b i t i o n does n o t d e s t r o y t h e r i g h t o f a c t i o n upon w h i c h r e c o v e r y i s sought, b u t m e r e l y imposes a d i s a b i l i t y t o maintain the action thereon u n t i l - requirethe merit o f s e c t i o n 5 5 0 4 h a s b e e n c o m p l i e d w i t h . " ( E m p h E i s added -- ) . I n c o n s t r u i n g t h e same r e s t r i c t i o n " t o m a i n t a i n " a n a c t i o n f o r n o n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e C a l i f o r n i a f i c t i t i o u s name s t a t u t e s , C a l i f o r n i a Court stated: " A n o b j e c t i o n t o t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f an a c t i o n o n t h e ground t h a t p l a i n t i f f has n o t c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f s e c t i o n s 2466 and 2468 o f t h e C i v i l Code b y f i l i n g and p u b l i s h i n g t h e c e r t i f i c a t e r e q u i r e d t h e r e b y , i s a mere m a t t e r o f abatement pending t h e t r i a l , which has t h e r e s u l t o f suspending t h e t r i a l u n t i l t h e s t a t u t e i s complied with. It i s not j u r i s d i c t i o n a l . B r y a n t v. We1 1 b a n k s , 8 8 C a l .App. 1 4 4 , 1 5 0 , 2 6 3 P. 332; C a l i f o r n i a S a v i n g s & Loan Soc. v. H a r r i s , 111 C a l . 1 3 3 , 1 3 6 , 4 3 P. 5 2 5 ; O n t a r i o S t a t e B a n k v. T i b b i t s , 8 0 C a l . 6 8 , 2 2 P. 66, 1 C.J.S., A b a t e m e n t a n d R e v i v a l , 9 9 1 , p. 1 2 9 . In t h e authority l a s t c i t e d i t i s said: " ' T h e f a i l u r e o f an i n d i v i d u a l o r p a r t n e r s h i p p l a i n t i f f , d o i n g b u s i n e s s u n d e r an assumed, f i c t i t i o u s , o r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e name, t o c o m p l y w i t h an a p p l i c a b l e s t a t u t e r e q u i r i n g t h e f i l i n g o f a prescribed a f f i d a v i t or c e r t i f i c a t e , i s m e r e l y a m a t t e r i n abatement, u n t i l t h e s t a t u t e i s complied with.' " I n t h e B r y a n t c a s e , s u p r a [ 8 8 C a l .App. 1 4 4 , 1 5 0 , 2 6 3 P. 3 3 5 1 , i t i s s a i d t h a t i t i s a s u f f i c i e n t compliance w i t h s e c t i o n 2468 o f t h e C i v i l Code i f t h e c e r t i f i c a t e i s f i l e d and a p u b l i s h e d ' a t any t i m e b e f o r e t r i a l . ' The s t a t u t e i n q u e s t i o n does n o t p r o h i b i t t h e i n s t i t u t i n g o r commencement o f an a c t i o n f o r f a i l u r e t o f i l e the certificate. I t mere1 v f o r b i d s t h e maintenance o f the a c t i o n ' u n t i l t i e c e r t i f i c a t e h a s been f i l e d and t h e p u b l i c a t i o n has been made.' B e f o r e an a c t i o n i s f i n a l l y d i s m i s s e d o n t h a t ground, p r i o r t o t h e t r i a l t h e p l a i n t i f f s h o u l d be g i v e n an o p p o r t u n i t y t o c o m p l y w i t h t h e s t a t u t e i f i t so d e s i r e s . " Kadota F i g Ass'n v . C a s e - S w a y n e Co. ( 1 9 4 6 ) , 73 C a l .App.2d 7 9 6 , 1 6 7 P.2d 5 1 8 , 5 2 3 . We a g r e e w i t h t h e d i s t i n c t i o n d r a w n b e t w e e n " m a i n t e n a n c e " and "commencement" i n the previously cited authority. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t was n o t i n e r r o r i n a l l o w i n g p l a i n t i f f t o c o m p l y w i t h t h e f i c t i t i o u s name p r o v i s i o n s p r i o r t o t r i a l . A p p e l l a n t ' s f i n a l c o n t e n t i o n i s t h a t t h e r e i s no l e g a l a u t h o r i t y t o s u p p o r t t h e g r a n t i n g o f t h e l i e n on t h e c u t undecked logs. T h e r e s p o n d e n t c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e l i e n g r a n t e d i s an e q u i t a b l e l i e n and i s a p p r o p r i a t e i n t h i s c a s e . The f a c t u a l b a s i s f o r t h e l i e n g r a n t e d i s S m i t h ' s a l l e g e d f a i l u r e t o d i s p o s e o f s l a s h p u r s u a n t t o t h e c o n t r a c t and t h e e c o n o m i c damage c a u s e d t o t h e p r o p e r t y a s a r e s u l t o f t h e c u t t i n g operation. As a r e s u l t o f a p p e l l a n t ' s a l l e g e d l y n o t c o m p l y i n g w i t h t h e s l a s h removal p r o v i s i o n , t h e Ranch w i l l i n o b t a i n i n g a n o t h e r t o remove t h e s l a s h . i n c u r e expense The s l a s h r e m o v a l c l a u s e p r o v i d e s t h a t S m i t h a g r e e s t o p i l e and d i s p o s e o f t h e s l a s h i n s u c h m a n n e r as t o be s a t i s f a c t o r y t o t h e S t a t e o f Montana. E v i d e n c e adduced a t t r i a l concerning slash d i sposal i n c l u d e d t e s t i m o n y f r o m an i n s p e c t o r f o r t h e S t a t e D i v i s i o n o f Forestry, C u r t i s Tesmer. T e s m e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t S m i t h was i n c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e s l a s h r e d u c t i o n agreement w i t h a few except i o n s i n September, 1978 ( p r i o r t o S m i t h ' s r e - e n t r y t o c u t 15 t o 25 more a c r e s i n O c t o b e r , 1978). Dodge a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e Ranch would i n c u r s u b s t a n t i a l c o s t i n removing s l a s h n o t d i s p o s e d o f by Smith. No e v i d e n c e was s u b m i t t e d on t h e a m o u n t o f e c o n o m i c damage s u f f e r e d b y t h e R a n c h as a r e s u l t o f S m i t h ' s breach i n c u t t i n g t r e e s n o t conveyed i n t h e c o n t r a c t , i n the alleged f a i l u r e t o dispose o f slash o r i n the value of trees cut and n o t decked. I n addition, t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s p l e a d i n g s make n o mention o f a claim f o r a lien. T h e r e s p o n d e n t c i t e s A m e r i c a n E q u i t a b l e A s s u r a n c e Co. Newman ( 1 9 5 7 ) , Jacobson, lien. 132 Mont. supra, 63, 3 1 3 P.2d 1023, v. and S o r e n s e n v. as a u t h o r i t y f o r t h e g r a n t i n g o f t h i s e q u i t a b l e We f i n d n e i t h e r c a s e r e l e v a n t t o t h e p r e s e n t a p p e a l ; Newman i n v o l v e d s u b r o g a t i o n a n d S o r e n s e n i n v o l v e d a p u r c h a s e money l i e n . A l i e n i s m e r e l y a c h a r g e o r encumbrance on p r o p e r t y w h i c h s u b j e c t s t h e p r o p e r t y t o t h e payment o f a c l a i m o r d e b t . T h e i s s u e o f damages was n e v e r r a i s e d , no e v i d e n c e was a d d u c e d o n t h e a m o u n t o f damages a n d t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t f a i l e d t o s t a t e t h e amount o f t h e l i e n g r a n t e d . A l t h o u g h we r e c o g n i z e t h a t a n e q u i t a b l e l i e n may be g r a n t e d u n d e r a g r e a t v a r i e t y o f circumstances, i n c l u d i n g breach o f c o n t r a c t , f o r such a l i e n where, as h e r e , t h e r e i s no b a s i s t h e r e i s no a s c e r t a i n e d d e b t o r claim. The j u d g m e n t and, as m o d i f i e d , i s m o d i f i e d by v a c a t i n g t h e l i e n p r o v i s i o n s t h e judgment i s affirmed, Chief Justice We c o n c u r : costs t o respondent. Mr. Justice John C. Sheehy concurs in part and dissents in part. I concur with the rest of the foregoing opinion, but I dissent from that part vacating the equitable lien created by the District Court. The majority is in error when it determines that there is no claim or debt here to which an equitable lien may reach. It is inconsistent to hold on the one hand that Madison Fork Ranch is entitled to an injunction because Smith indiscriminately cut logs by clear-cutting irrespective of whether the trees were infected by the pine beetle, and on the other hand, to deny an equitable lien where the felled logs are wrongfully appropriated by Smith. The doctrine of equitable liens is not limited merely to property which is subject to the payment of a claim or debt. The power of a District Court to grant an equitable lien is as broad as the reach of equity itself, out of considerations of right and justice, to protect for the rightful owner property unlawfully appropriated. "An equitable lien may arise independently of any express agreement; it may arise by implication from the conduct and dealings of the parties. As the rule is frequently stated, in the absence of an express contract, an equitable lien, based on those maxims which lie at the foundation of equity jurisprudence, may arise by implication out of general considerations of right and justice, where, as applied to the relations of the parties and the circumstances of their dealings, there is some obligation or duty to be enforced. However, the tendency is to limit rather than extend the doctrine of constructive liens, and, in order that such a lien may be claimed, either the aid of a court of equity must be requisite to the owner so that he can be compelled to do equity or there must be some element of fraud in the matter as a ground of equitable relief. Such a lien will not be implied and enforced where the facts and circumstances present no grounds for equitable relief, and there is an adequate remedy at law, as where the parties themselves have stipulated for a purely legal liability ... ". . . -f -a c o u r t of e q u i t y can t r a c e money o r I property unlawfullyobtained o r a p p r o p r i a t e d i n t o any o t h it w i it f o --e r s h a p e , - - l l i n t e r v e n e t o s e c u r e - -r t h e owner, by h o l d i n g it t o be h i s by g i v i n g him l i e n on it; b u t s u c h a l i e n c a n n o t be e n f o r c e d on o p r o p e r t y which h a s n o t been enhanced o r augmented by t h e u n l a w f u l a p p r o p r i a t i o n 53 C.J.S. 844, 545, L i e n s , S 4 (1). (Emphasis added. 1 or . . ." A s t o t h o s e l o g s which w e r e r i g h t f u l l y c u t by Smith, t h a t i s t h o s e trees which w e r e i n f e s t e d by t h e mountain p i n e b e e t l e , s u c h trees became t h e p r o p e r t y o f Smith under t h e t e r m s of t h i s agreement immediately upon s e v e r a n c e t h e r e o f . A s t o t h o s e trees which were w r o n g f u l l y f e l l e d by Smith, t h o s e t h a t w e r e n o t s o i n f e c t e d , t h e r e w a s an unlawful appropriation. Those l a w f u l l y a p p r o p r i a t e d and t h o s e u n l a w f u l l y a p p r o p r i a t e d now a p p e a r t o b e i n a s i n g l e mass, u n i d e n t i f i a b l e p e r h a p s , and t h e s i t u a t i o n i s one r i p e f o r t h e e q u i t a b l e power of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t t o p r o t e c t t h e p r o p e r t y o f Madison Fork Ranch. Suburban Corp. (Fl. I n Krusen Land & Timber Co. v. Tampa 1 9 3 5 ) , 158 So. 712, where t h e lumber company r e c e i v e d lumber b e l o n g i n g t o o t h e r s and knowingly sawed and commingled i t w i t h i t s own i n an u n i d e n t i f i a b l e m a s s , t h e ex lumber company w a s a t r u s t e e - m a l e f i c i o and an e q u i t a b l e l i e n c o u l d be e n f o r c e d a g a i n s t t h e whole m a s s of lumber. The C o u r t i n g r a n t i n g i n j u n c t i v e r e l i e f was s i t t i n g i n equity. A c o u r t s i t t i n g i n e q u i t y h a s a l l power r e q u i s i t e t o r e n d e r j u s t i c e between t h e p a r t i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i f t h e i n t e n t and d i s p o s i t i o n o f one p a r t y i s n o t t o p e r f o r m i t s contractual obligations. Fish & Game (1979), Link v. S t a t e By - Mont. , & Through Dept. of 591 P.2d 214, 3 6 St.Rep. 355. The m a j o r i t y h a s hobbled t h e e q u i t y c o u r t u n n e c e s s a r i l y i n p r e v e n t i n g it from g i v i n g complete e q u i t a b l e r e l i e f . I would a f f i r m i n t o t o . Justice
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
