Bennett v. Hill

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court reversed summary judgment in favor of defendants concerning a wall constructed near the boundary of a golf course and neighboring properties. The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the wall was a spite fence, constituted a nuisance, and was incidental to golf-course use under subdivision restrictions. The court also reversed the award of attorney fees and remanded the matter for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. Summary judgment for defendants was improper because genuine issues of material fact existed concerning whether the wall served a beneficial purpose by stopping trash and trespassers.
2. A beneficial or reasonable purpose does not, by itself, immunize conduct or a structure that would otherwise constitute a nuisance.
3. Summary judgment was improper because genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether the restrictions were waived and whether the wall was incidental to use of the property as a golf course under Paragraph 16.
4. The attorney-fee award had to be reversed because defendants no longer prevailed after reversal of the summary-judgment orders.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred by granting summary judgment for defendants on the spite-fence claim.
2. Whether the district court erred by granting summary judgment for defendants on the nuisance claim.
3. Whether construction of the wall violated the subdivision restrictions, including whether the restrictions had been waived or whether the golf-course exception applied.
4. Whether the district court erred by awarding attorney fees to defendants.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded