This case concerns the U.S. government's condemnation of over 5,000 acres of land, including Crow Indian allotted lands on the Crow Reservation in Montana, to build the Yellowtail Dam and Reservoir for the Missouri River Basin Project. The Indian landowners moved to dismiss, contending that the government lacked authority because it had not secured consent from the Crow Tribal Council for any irrigation-related use of reservation lands. The court denied the motion, ruling that the Secretary of the Interior possessed statutory authority under the Flood Control Act, Federal Reclamation Laws, and 40 U.S.C. § 257 to acquire the property by eminent domain for multiple public purposes such as flood control, power generation, and irrigation. The court further held that once Congress delegates the determination of necessity to an administrative officer, that determination is generally not subject to judicial review.
This case concerned whether a bequest to the decedent's surviving wife under his will qualified for the federal estate tax marital deduction under 26 U.S.C.A. § 812, where the will contained a clause directing the property to the children if the wife was not living at the time of the decree of distribution. The wife was alive at distribution, and a Montana state court had interpreted the clause to mean the gift vested unconditionally if she survived the testator. The court held that the taxpayers were entitled to the deduction and a refund of overpaid taxes and interest. The core reasoning was that the state court's construction of the will controlled the character of the interest passing to the wife, the government was bound by that decree in the absence of any pleaded collusion, and the gift was therefore not subject to a disqualifying contingency.
This case involved judicial review of a U.S. Civil Service Commission order finding that Ralph J. Anderson violated Section 12(a) of the Hatch Political Activities Act by making a radio address opposing a U.S. Senate candidate while serving as Legal Adviser to Montana's Department of Public Welfare, a state agency receiving federal grants. The Commission determined that Anderson's "principal employment" was in connection with the federally financed state role. The court reviewed the full record and the statutory text, noting that Congress had amended the provision to use "principal employment" instead of broader language, that Anderson spent more time and earned more income from private law practice than from his state position, and that the Commission had impermissibly inserted the word "public" into the statute. The court concluded that the Commission's order was not in accordance with law, denied the Commission's motion for summary judgment, granted Anderson's motion for judgment on the pleadings, and remanded the proceeding to the Commission.
The case involved two consolidated actions between the Hutterian Brethren of Wolf Creek, a Canadian corporation, and the Haas family over a 1947 contract for the sale of Montana farmland. The corporation, acting through an undisclosed agent, purchased the property without first qualifying to do business in Montana as required by state law, and it operated the ranch for over five years without obtaining the necessary license or filing reports. The court granted the motion to dismiss the corporation's suit for specific performance and damages (No. 1401) and, on its own motion, remanded the Haases' suit to cancel the contract and for an accounting (No. 1437) to state court. It reasoned that a foreign corporation has no legal existence outside its state of incorporation and cannot maintain an action in Montana courts until it complies with qualification statutes, citing precedents such as Bank of Augusta v. Earle and Woods v. Interstate Realty Co.; belated compliance after litigation began was held insufficient.
The case involved a dispute between a commercial tenant operating a department store and its landlord over the interpretation of a percentage lease for premises in Great Falls, Montana. The tenant sought a declaratory judgment regarding whether sales of farm implements and equipment from a separate building across the alley counted as net retail sales subject to the 2% additional rent clause, and whether the landlord could terminate the lease for alleged defaults in rent payments and reporting. The court concluded that the farm equipment sales were part of the store's operations and had been obtained on the leased premises, so they were included in the percentage rent calculation. On the forfeiture claim, the court held that tender of unpaid rent, interest, and costs while the tenant remained in possession relieved any forfeiture, as the lease provision was intended solely to secure payment of rent, and minor accounting delays did not support termination.
This case concerns a dispute over ownership of the motion picture rights to the book "The American Cowboy" by Will James, who died in 1942. Plaintiff Snook purchased the rights from the estate executor for $2,500 after the sale was court-approved, while defendant Blank claimed an oral gift of the rights from James before his death. The court ruled for the plaintiff in this equity action to quiet title, finding no valid written transfer of the copyright or movie rights to the defendant as required by the Copyright Act. The decision rested on the absence of any writing from James, the defendant's prior claim against the estate that treated the rights as an estate asset without asserting ownership, and the need for clear and convincing evidence of any gift.
