STATE EX REL VICTOR S INC v DIST

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 13150 I N THE SUPREME C U T O THE STATE O MONTANA OR F F 1975 T E STATE O MONTANA, ON THE RELATION H F O VICTOR'S,INC., F A Montana C o r p o r a t i o n , R e l a t o r and A p p l i c a n t , THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT O THE STATE O MONTANA, I N AND F F F R THE COUNTY O CASCADE; THE HONORABLE O F B. W. THOMAS, D i s t r i c t Judge, Being t h e P r e s i d i n g Judge and t h e C i t y o f Great F a l l s , A Municipa 1 C o r p o r a t i o n , Respondents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING: Counsel o f Record: For R e l a t o r : Smith, Emmons and B a i l l i e , G r e a t F a l l s , Montana Robert J. Ernmons a r g u e d , G r e a t F a l l s , Montana For Respondents : Alexander, Kuenning, Miller and Ugrin, G r e a t F a l l s , Montana P a u l D. M i l l e r a r g u e d , G r e a t F a l l s , Montana Submitted: September 30, 1975 Decided: Filed : ;Gjl I I 5% JAN 7 1376 T h i s m a t t e r i s b e f o r e t h e Court on an a p p l i c a t i o n by Victor's, m c . , d e f e n d a n t i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , f o r a w r i t of supervisory ~ o n t r o l r other appropriate w r i t , directed t o the o J i s t r i c t c o u r t , Cascade County, and t o t h e p r e s i d i n g j u d g e , dssuming and t a k i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n of a l l f u r t h e r proceedings i n jchat c e r t a i n c a u s e i n s a i d c o u r t , b e i n g Cause No. 78667-B, entitled ' C I T Y O GREAT FALLS, a m u n i c i p a l c o r p o r a t i o n , and GREAT FALLS F LN'I'ERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY, P l a i n t i f f s , v s . V I C T O R ' S , a '\fontana c o r p o r a t i o n , Defendant". INC., T h i s Court was asked t o review t h e judgment e n t e r e d t h e r e i n on J u l y 1 6 , 1975, a s amended by o r d e r oi t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d a t e d August 8 , 1975, and t o r e v e r s e t h e j ~ d g m e n t and r e n d e r judgment f o r r e l a t o r and a p p l i c a n t h e r e i n , ~ ~ l c t o r ' s nc. I, L L P r i o r t o t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n V i c t o r ' s , I n c . had f i l e d n o t i c e of a p p e a l from t h e f i n a l judgment of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t . ~ i h i s Court deemed t h e a p p e a l t o be i n a d e q u a t e , c o n s o l i d a t e d t h e dppeal [ t h i s C o u r t ' s ?,,13149] w i t h t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n [ t h i s C o u r t ' s d13150], and assumed j u r i s d i c t i o n under s u p e r v i s o r y c o n t r o l . 'She m a t t e r was b r i e f e d , h e a r d i n o r a l argument and s u b m i t t e d . I n 1947 t h e C i t y of Great F a l l s , a m u n i c i p a l c o r p o r a t i o n , * 2 b i a i r i e J from t h e Montana Liquor C o n t r o l Board a b e e r and a l i q u o r L i ~ e n s et o o p e r a t e a l i q u o r b u s i n e s s t o be known a s t h e "Great v h l l s Municipal A i r p o r t ~ o u n g e " , l o c a t e d a t t h e Great F a l l s b i u ~ i i c i p a lA i r p o r t . This a i r p o r t i s o u t s i d e t h e c o r p o r a t e l i m i t s ~f t h e C i t y o f Great F a l l s . Simultaneously t h e C i t y , a s l e s s o r , and Donald F. Robinson, db ' - e s s z e , e n t e r e d i n t o a l e a s e agreement f o r r e s t a u r a n t , b a r , and ~ o c k t a i llounge f a c i l i t i e s a t t h e Great F a l l s A i r p o r t . urovided i n p a r t : The l e a s e "8. P a r t y o f t h e f i r s t p a r t [ C i t y ] i s t h e Dwner o f b e e r and l i q u o r p e r m i t s numbered 1059 and 990 respectively. I t i s covenanted and a g r e e d t h a t s a i d p e r m i t s w i l l b e a s s i g n e d t o and o p e r a t e d u n d e r t h e name o f p a r t y of t h e second p a r t [Robinson] f o r t h e duration of t h i s l e a s e , t o be re-assigned t o p a r t y o f t h e f i r s t p a r t upon t h e t e r m i n a t i o n of s a i d l e a s e 9: 9:" f o r any c a u s e w h a t s o e v e r . The C i t y was t o b e p a i d a p e r c e n t a g e , b a s e d on t h e g r o s s r e c e i p t s o f ~ o b i n s o n ' so p e r a t i o n . O May 8 , 1948, t h e C i t y s u b m i t t e d a s i g n e d a s s i g n m e n t n o f i n t e r e s t t o t h e Montana Liquor C o n t r o l Board which p r o v i d e d : II For a good and v a l u a b l e c o n s i d e r a t i o n and s u b j e c t t o t h e a p p r o v a l of t h e Montana L i q u o r C o n t r o l Board, I h e r e b y s e l l , a s s i g n , t r a n s f e r and s e t o v e r u n t o Don F. Robinson a l l right, t i t l e and i n t e r e s t i n and t o [ t h e b e e r and l i q u o r l i c e n s e (Emphasis s u p p l i e d ) . ** The assignment was s i g n e d by t h e mayor o f G r e a t F a l l s . The C i t y d i d n o t t a k e any s e c u r i t y i n t e r e s t i n t h e l i c e n s e s . I n November 1952, t h e C i t y and Robinson e x e c u t e d a new l e a s e f o r t h e a i r p o r t lounge f a c i l i t i e s f o r a term o f f i v e y e a r s . T h i s lease c o n t a i n e d a p r o v i s i o n which was t o b e u s e d i n a l l l e a s e s between t h e C i t y and v a r i o u s lessees o f t h e a i r p o r t lounge u n t i l t h e present l e a s e with v i c t o r ' s , Inc. The p r o v i s i o n changed from t h e o r i g i n a l l e a s e r e a d s : "8. P a r t y o f t h e F i r s t P a r t [ C i t y ] was o r i g i n a l l y t h e owner o f t h e S t a t e o f Montana r e t a i l b e e r and l i q u o r l i c e n s e s u s e d i n t h e o p e r a t i o n of s a i d b a r and c o c k t a i l l o u n g e o p e r a t e d by p a r t y of t h e Second P a r t i n t h e a b o v e - d e s c r i b e d p r e m i s e s , and s a i d l i c e n s e s have been a s s i g n e d t o and a r e now i n t h e name d f p a r t y o f t h e Second P a r t ; i t i s covenanted and a g r e e d t h a t s a i d p e r m i t s and l i c e n s e s a r e t o b e o p e r a t e d under t h e name o f p a r t y o f t h e Second P a r t and t h a t p a r t y o f t h e Second P a r t w i l l c o n t i n u e t o pay f o r a l l o f s a i d l i c e n s e s and t h e r e n e w a l s o f a l l of s a i d l i c e n s e s , and s h a l l pay a l l f e e s , t a x e s and dharges assessed under F e d e r a l , S t a t e , o r Local s t a t u t e s and and o r d i n a n c e s , i n s o f a r a s t h e y a r e a p p l i c a b l e , c h a t p a r t y of t h e Second P a r t w i l l a s s i g n t o p a r t y o f t h e F i r s t P a r t upon t h e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h i s l e a s e a l l ~f s a i d b e e r and l i q u o r l i c e n s e s . " ( Emphasis s u p p l i e d . ) 'The colliperlsation p a i d by t h e l e s s e e was changed from a p e r c e n t a g e of r h e g r v s s t o a s e t monthly r e n t a l f i g u r e . I'he I_lcerrses w e i e i r a n s L e ~ r e Ja ~urrlber o f Limes and e v e n t u a L l y t r a n s f e r r e d by t h e Horizon Club t o V i c t o r ' s , I n c . in 1362 under a Horizon Club l e a s e which was t o e x p i r e i n 1964. In dach c a s e t h e assignment accompanied a s a l e of t h e lounge and i l x t u r e s t h e m s e l v e s t o g e t h e r w i t h a t r a n s f e r o f t h e l i c e n s e s from owner t o t h e o t h e r and mortgages p l a c e d upon t h e l i c e n s e s by dlle velidee o r bank and f i l e d w i t h t h e Montana L i q u o r Control. Board, ! : d s e c u r e payment under t h e t r a n s a c t i o n . I n March 1966, v i c t o r ' s , Lric. executed i t s own l e a s e agreement w i t h t h e C i t y . The s e c t i o n p r c v i d i n g f o r c o n t r o l o f t h e l i c e n s e s i s somewhat d i f f e r e n t t h a n t h e pdst l e a s e s i n t h a t it only provides t h a t l e s s e e a s s i g n h i s i n t e r e s t n o t t h e l i c e n s e s t h e m s e l v e s i n t h i s language: II L e s s o r was o r i g i n a l l y t h e owner of t h e S t a t e o f Montana r e t a i l b e e r and l i q u o r l i c e n s e s u s e d i n t h e o p e r a t i o n o f s a i d b a r and c o c k t a i l lounge o p e r a t e d by L e s s e e i n t h e a b o v e - d e s c r i b e d p r e m i s e s , and s a i d l i c e n s e s have been a s s i g n e d t o and a r e now i n t h e liame of t h e L e s s e e ; i t i s covenanted and a g r e e d t h a t > a i d p e r m i t s and l i c e n s e s a r e t o b e o p e r a t e d under che name o f L e s s e e and t h a t L e s s e e w i l l c o n t i n u e t o pay d l 1 of s a i d l i c e n s e s and r e n e w a l s o f a l l o f s a i d l i c e n s e s , dnd s h a l l pay a l l f e e s , t a x e s and c h a r g e s a s s e s s e d u n d e r ) J e d e r a l , S t a t e , o r L o c a l s t a t u t e s and o r d i n a n c e s , i n s o f a r a s t h e y a r e a p p l i c a b l e . L e s s e e s h a l l , upon t e r m i n a t i o n of t h i s Lease, assign t o Lessor a l l of h i s i n t e r e s t i n and t o s a i d Beer and L i q u o r l i c e n s e ; PROVIDED, howe v e r , t h a t i f L e s s e e a s s i g n s t h i s Lease o r s u b - l e a s e s ;:he p r e m i s e s a s h e r e i n p r o v i d e d i n Paragraph 1 2 , L e s s e e nay s e l l and a s s i g n , s o l e l y w i t h w r i t t e n c o n s e n t of L e s s o r i s i n t e r e s t i n s a i d Lease t o t h e A s s i g n e e o r SubL e s s e e . (Emphasis s u p p l i e d ) . Lessee a r g u e s t h a t t h e word II ease" i n t h e l a s t l i n e o f t h e above quoted p a r a g r a p h i s i n e r r o r and makes no s e n s e a s u s e d and s h o u l d be " l i c e n s e " . The C i t y o f G r e a t F a l l s h a s c o n s t r u c t e d a new a i r p o r t cerrninal b u i l d i n g and h a s c o n t r a c t e d w i t h an o u t o f s t a t e f i r m d e s i g n a t e d D y n e t e r i a , I n c . , t o o p e r a t e t h e food and lounge f a c i l i t y and h a s c o n t r a d t o f u r n i s h D y n e t e r i a , I n c . t h e l i c e n s e s i n question here. The l e a s e w i t h v i c t o r ' s , I n c . e x p i r e d and t h e C i t y b r o u g h t an a c t i o n a g a i n s t V i c t o r ' s , I n c . t o s p e c i f i c a l l y enf o r c e t h e l e a s e p r o v i s i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o assignment o f t h e r e t a i l Liquor dnd 3eer L ~ c e a s e sand t h d c V i c L o r s , inc. b e o r d e r e d co dssign t o t h e City o r i t s designee. The m a t t e r was t r i e d t o t h e d i s c r i c t c o u r t and e x t e n s i v e r l n d i n g s of f a c t were d e t e r m i n e d by t h e c o u r t t o g e t h e r w i t h e o r ~ c l u s i o n so f law which i n e s s e n c e found t h a t t h e C i t y had n e v e r r e c e i v e d any c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r t h e l i c e n s e s ; t h a t n e i t h e r V i c t o r ' s , i.nc. n o r i t s p r e d e c e s s o r s p a i d a s e p a r a t e c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r t h e l i c e n s e s on a c q u i s i t i o n ; t h a t t h e r e was a d e q u a t e c o n s i d e r a t i o n < u n s p e c i f i e d ] t o s u p p o r t t r a n s f e r of t h e l i c e n s e s t o t h e C i t y upon t e r m i n a t i o n by V i c t o r ' s , I n c . ; t h a t t h e City could l e g a l l y ioLd a l i q u o r and a b e e r l i c e n s e ; and t h a t d e f e n d a n t V i c t o r ' s , I n c . t r a n s f e r t h e l i c e n s e s t o t h e C i t y w i t h i n t h i r t y days o r t h e c l e r k of c o u r t would b e a u t h o r i z e d t o c o m p l e t e t h e t r a n s f e r o f t h e Licenses t o t h e C i t y . V i c t o r ' s , I n c . p r e s e n t s many i s s u e s f o r r e v i e w , however, Ehe i o n t r o l l i n g i s s u e i s whether t h e C i t y must pay c o n s i d e r a t i o n so V i c t o r ' s , and b e e r I n c . f o r t h e assignment o f i t s i n t e r e s t i n t h e l i q u o r l i c e n s e s t o t h e City o r i t s designee. The s u i t i s a s p e c i f i c performance a c t i o n which means i-t j e e k s t o compel t h e performance o f a c o n t r a c t i n t h e p r e c i s e Lerms a g r e e d upon. The f o u n d a t i o n o f a s u i t f o r s p e c i f i c performance uf a c o n t r a c t i s t h a t by c o m p e l l i n g t h e p a r t i e s t o do t h e v e r y r h i n g s whey have a g r e e d t o do more complete j u s t i c e i s a t t a i n e d ehan by g i v i n g damages f o r b r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t . I t i s an e x t r a - d r d i n a r y remedy, which was n o t r e c o g n i z e d a t common law. So, s p e c i f i c performance i s p u r e l y a n e q u i t a b l e remedy and i s governed by equitable principles. I n 8 1 C.J.S. 8 1 C.J.S. S p e c i f i c Performance 5 1, p. 408. S p e c i f i c Performance 5 3 , p . 411, i t i s ttk ; s p e c i f i c performance w i l l b e o r d e r e d o n l y t on e q u i t a b l e grounds i n view o f a l l t h e c o n d i t i o n s s u r r o u n d i n g t h e p a r t i c u l a r c a s e . ;k ;k 9~ II A b i l l in e q u i r y f o r s p r c i r i c performar~ce i s an a p p e a l t o t h e conscience of t h e c o u r t , and s e n e r a l l y , i n such a proceeding, t h e i n q u i r y must 5e whether, i n e q u i t y and good c o n s c i e n c e , t h e c o u r t should s p e c i f i c a l l y e n f o r c e t h e c o n t r a c t . I I 4 e c t i o n 17-808, R.C.M. 1947, s t a t e s t h a t s p e c i f i c perior~uiincecannot be e n f o r c e d a g a i n s t a p a r t y t o a c o n t r a c t i L t h a t party che contract. II h a s n o t r e c e i v e d an adequate c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r " Whether c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s adequate f o r a given d o n t r a c t depends on t h e f a c t s and c i r c u m s t a n c e s of each c a s e . T h e r e f o r e , we a r e r e q u i r e d t o c l o s e l y examine t h e f a c t s and :ircumstances surrounding t h i s c a s e t o determine whether t h e z o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h e c o n t r a c t was adequate t o e q u i t a b l y j u s t i f y t h e assignment of V i c t o r ' s , I n c . 1 s i n t e r e s t i n t h e l i c e n s e s t o the City. Although t h i s s u i t i s brought o n l y t o e n f o r c e a pro- v i s i o n i n a l e a s e between t h e C i t y and V i c t o r ' s , I n c . , t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n a s t o whether t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r assignment ai ~ i c t o r ' s ,I n c . I s i n t e r e s t was adequate cannot be made by ~ o o k i n go n l y t o t h e c o n t e n t s of t h e l e a s e . f o r t h e l e a s e , t h e C i t y and v i c t o r ' s , In negotiations I n c . were aware of t h e f a c t t h a t v i c t o r ' s , I n c . had p a i d a s u b s t a n t i a l amount of money f o r i n r e r e s t i n t h e b a r f i x t u r e s , l i c e n s e s and t h e p r e v i o u s l e a s e . Both p a r t i e s were a l s o aware of t h e f a c t t h a t a l t h o u g h a l l previous l e a s e s c o n t a i n e d p r o v i s i o n s r e q u i r i n g assignment of t h e a l c o h o l l i c e n s e s themselves upon t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e l e a s e , t h i s p r o v i s i o n had never been employed by t h e C i t y - - a l t h o u g h t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r i t s u s e had a r i s e n on f o u r o c c a s i o n s . These a d d i t i o n a l f a c t s a r e p e r t i n e n t h e r e . court held: The d i s t r i c t Id- ;r .+t no t i m e d i d t h e C i t y 3 f Great F a l l s e v e r r e c e i v e any independent o r s e p a r a t e cons i d e r a t i o n o r payment f o r t r a n s f e r by i t of t h e i i q u o r and b e e r l i c e n s e s t o Robinson o r t o any o f t h e o t h e r l e s s e e s , i n c l u d i n g defendant. I I #% .r- ,& .As h e r e t o f o r e s e t f o r t h , t h e C i t y i n d e a l i n g w i t h Robinson firs^ zlaimed ownership of t h e l i c e n s e s . Thereafter t h e City f i l e d a Jocument w i t h t h e Montana Liquor C o n t r o l Board s e t t i n g f o r t h t h a t t h e City 11 For a good and v a l u a b l e c o n s i d e r a t i o n arid t r a n s f e r and s e t over u n t o Don F. Robinson c i c l e and i n t e r e s t i n and t o k ; f" ; * ;k * s e l l , a s s i g n * * * a l l right, the licenses here i n question. T h e r e a f t e r , t h e l e a s e arrangement was a l t e r e d t o s e t f o r t h t h a t zhe C i t y was t h e o r i g i n a l owner, r a t h e r t h a n owner. Robinson and a l l subsequent l e s s e e s and s u b l e s s e e s were allowed t o s e l l t h e i r i n t e r e s t s i n t h e b a r f i x t u r e s , l i c e n s e s and t h e l e a s e t o t h e succeeding l e s s e e f o r whatever p r i c e t h e c u r r e n t b u s i n e s s market would b e a r . The C i t y was involved i n t h e s e s a l e s orily t o t h e e x t e n t of c o n s e n t i n g t o t h e assignments. The C i t y a t no time r e c e i v e d t h e l i c e n s e s from t h e vendor-assignor and t h e n r e a s s i g n e d t h e l i c e n s e s t o t h e vendee-assignee. Four p r e v i o u s Leases e x p i r e d and t h e C i t y d i d n o t demand r e t u r n of t h e l i c e n s e s . P u b l i c - r e c o r d ownership [ a t t h e Montana Liquor C o n t r o l % o a r d l showed t h e l e s s e e s t o be t h e s o l e owners of t h e l i c e n s e s . S e c t i o n 4-410, R.C.M. 1947, r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e names of a l l persons i u c e r e s t e d i n t h e l i c e n s e must appear on t h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r t h e license. S e c t i o n 4-412(7), R.C.M. may n o t be i s s u e d t o one business. " If 1947, p r o v i d e s t h a t a l i c e n s e who i s n o t t h e owner and o p e r a t o r of t h e (Emphasis s u p p l i e d ) , A l l a p p l i c a b l e f e d e r a l , s t a t e and l o c a l f e e s and t a x e s a t c r n d a n t w i t h t h e l i c e n s e s were p a i d by t h e l e s s e e s , i n c l u d i n g ~ i c t o r ' s ,I n c . On t h r e e o c c a s i o n s , t h e l i c e n s e s were mortgaged by v a r i o u s lessees t o a bank o r o t h e r c o r p o r a t i o n f o r l o a n s of money. The l i c e n s e s were used a s c o l l a t e r a l and t h e mortgages d u l y recorded w i t h t h e Montana Liquor Control Board a s r e q u i r e d by law. C i t y consented t o a l l t h r e e mortgages. The Montana Bank of Great F a l l s i s c u r r e n t l y a mortgagee of t h e l i c e n s e s on a loan f o r approximately $40,000. O two occasions n - i n 1954 and 1955 - contracts for sale were used t o convey t h e assignment of t h e l e a s e and l i c e n s e s from one l e s s e e t o a n o t h e r . default, the licenses Language i n t h e c o n t r a c t s provided t h a t upon would be s e t over t o t h e vendor-lessee and t h e y s h a l l belong t o t h e vendors. II ownershipf' i s made i n t h e s e c o n t r a c t s . N mention of t h e C l t y ' s o Copies of t h e s e c o n t r a c t s were f i l e d w i t h t h e Montana Liquor Control Board and t h e C i t y . Extensive argument was presented concerning t h e n e g o t i a t i o n w i t h Palmer, t h e a i r p o r t manager, and V i c t o r ' s , I n c . on t h e very p o i n t of compensation f o r t h e l i c e n s e s upon t e r m i n a t i o n o r s a l e . It seems t o be admitted t h a t t h i s took p l a c e and Palmer d i d have a u t h o r i t y t o n e g o t i a t e a i r p o r t c o n t r a c t s , b u t former members of t h e a i r p o r t commission could n o t confirm any agreements on t h i s issue. Yet, c o i n c i d e n t l y a t t h i s time, t h e C i t y e l e c t e d t o change t h e language a s i t p e r t a i n e d t o reassignment i n t h e l e a s e from a reassignment of t h e l i c e n s e s t o a reassignment of l e s s e e ' s [Victor's, Inc.] i n t e r e s t i n the licenses. Together w i t h a l l of t h e s e f a c t s t h e r e i s a d i s p u t e d p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t t h e same l e a s e i n t e r e s t assignment c l a u s e gave V i c t o r ' s , I n c . t h e r i g h t t o s e l l i t s i n t e r e s t i n t h e l i c e n s e s upon assignment, w i t h consent o f t h e City. Indulging t h e C i t y w i t h t h e presumption, which we t h i n k w e must, t h a t i t complied w i t h t h e laws of t h e s t a t e o f Montana and t h a t a l l of i t s d e a l i n g s w i t h i t s l e s s e e s were honest and open and none were intended t o evade t h e l i c e n s i n g laws of t h e s t a t e of Montana and i t s a f f i r m a t i v e a c t s o r non-action over t h e term of t h e s e t r a n s a c t i o n s i n d i c a t e d i t s i n t e n t i o n s , t h e C i t y could have no i n t e r e s t i n t h e l i c e n s e s themselves. It d i d a t a l l cirues by Lease dgreeine~li;d i o v l d e i n a c she I-lcenses n u s t s t a y w i t h t h e l o c a t i o n by a s s i g n m e n t when t h e l e s s e e t e r m i n a t e d h i s business relationship with the City. v i c t o r ' s , Inc. agrees t h a t r h e l i c e n s e s c a n n o t b e moved from t h e a i r p o r t . These l i c e n s e s a r e p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y and have a r e c o g n i z e d v a l u e above and beyond t h e f e e s p a i d t o t h e v a r i o u s government dgencies. These l i c e n s e s a c q u i r e d t h i s t y p e o f v a l u e b e c a u s e t h e Clry never required nor c o n t r o l l e d t h e reassignment of t h e l i c e n s e s when a l e a s e t e r m i n a t e d . I f t h e C i t y had e n f o r c e d t h e l e a s e ~ r o v i s i o n si t c o u l d have r e a s s i g n e d t h e l i c e n s e s on e a c h t r a n s d c t i o n and t h e new l e s s e e would t h e n n o t have been r e q u i r e d t o Day t h e s e l l e r f o r t h e l i c e n s e s . The C i t y d i d n o t do t h i s . It acquiesced i n t h e t r a n s f e r s d l r e c t l y from p a r t y t o p a r t y f o r c a s h c o n s i d e r a t i o n w i t h t h e r e s u l t c h a t t h e l i c e n s e s a c q u i r e d v a l u e t o t h e p a r t i e s and t h e y p a i d ~ o r ~ s i d e r a t i ofn r them. o v i c t o r ' s , I n c . was t h e r e f o r e e n t i t l e d t o r e l y upon t h e a c t s and c o n d u c t o f t h e C i t y t h a t , when t h e t i m e L-arne f o r a n assignment from V i c t o r ' s , I n c ., i t could a s s i g n t o t h e new o p e r a t o r of t h e b u s i n e s s and b e compensated f o r t h e v a l u e of t h e Licenses. However, t h e C i t y d e c i d e d t o a s s i g n t h e l i c e n s e s t o t h e new l e s s e e , Dyneteria, I n c . , w i t h o u t compensation from i t and now demands t h a t v i c t o r ' s , I n c . make a g r a t u i t o u s a s s i g n m e n t . As h e r e t o f o r e s t a t e d , t h e C i t y h a s t h e r i g h t t o i n s i s t on V i c t o r ' s , Lnc. t s a s s i g n m e n t o f i t s i n t e r e s t i n t h e l i c e n s e s b u t i f t h e C i t y would l i k e t o bestow t h i s g r a t u i t y upon D y n e t e r i a , I n c . , t h e C i t y must compensate V i c t o r ' s , I n c . i n an amount e q u a l t o t h e t r u e market v a l u e of t h e p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y . The C i t y c l a i m s and t h e t r i a l c o u r t h e l d t h a t a d e q u a t e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s u p p o r t e d t h e t r a n s f e r demanded by t h e C i t y , a l t h o u g h the court did not specify t h e nature of t h e consideration. Generally speaking, c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s t h e p r i c e bargained f o r and p a i d f o r a promise. 17 C.J.S. C o n t r a c t s $70, p. 747. Consideration s u f f i c i e n t t o warrant s p e c i f i c performance f o r t h e assignment o f v a l u a b l e p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y such a s l i q u o r l i c e n s e s j u s t b e obvious and unambiguous. I n reviewing t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r t h e two c o n t r a c t s , t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n which s u p p o r t s t h e l e a s e between t h e C i t y and v i c t o r ' s , Inc. was s i m i l a r t o t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n which had supported e a r l i e r l e a s e s between t h e C i t y and p r i o r lessees. The l e s s e e was t o pay t h e C i t y monthly r e n t ($600 p e r month i n t h e c u r r e n t l e a s e ) and o p e r a t e t h e lounge under e s t a b l i s h e d minimum s p e c i f i c a t i o n s . The C i t y i n r e t u r n l e a s e s t h e space t o t h e various p a r t i e s . The c o n s i d e r a t i o n which supported t h e s a l e s and a s s i g n ments of i n t e r e s t between s u c c e s s i v e l e s s e e s was an exchange of money, e i t h e r d i r e c t l y o r under a c o n t r a c t f o r s a l e , i n r e t u r n f o r t h e package of (a) b a r f i x t u r e s , (b) l i c e n s e s , and ( c ) l e a s e hold. The i n t e r e s t i n t h o s e t h r e e items was s o l d a s a u n i t , b u t i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e most important item o f t h e t h r e e was t h e licenses. A l i q u o r l i c e n s e i s a v a l u a b l e p i e c e of p e r s o n a l property. Witness t h e $40,000 mortgage obtained by v i c t o r ' s , I n c . from a bank w i t h t h e b e e r and l i q u o r l i c e n s e s used a s c o l l a t e r a l . S t a l l i n g e r v. Gcs S, 121 Mont. 437, 438, 193 P.2d 810. I f all that was s o l d between vendor and vendee l e s s e e s was t h e f i x t u r e s i n a l e a s e d b a r , i t i s c e r t a i n t h a t t h e s a l e p r i c e would be s u b s t a n t i a l l y l e s s than i f b e e r and l i q u o r l i c e n s e s a l s o were included i n t h e s a l e . The C i t y claims t h a t t h e " C i t y ' s w i l l i n g n e s s t o a l l o w t h e t r a n s f e r o f t h e l i c e n s e s and l e a s e t o [ v i c t o r ' s , Inc. ] and t o permit [ V i c t o r ' s , I n c . ] t o c o n t i n u e i n possession of t h e premises a f t e r e x p i r a t i o n of t h e i n i t i a l l e a s e i s a l l t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n which i s n e c e s s a r y t o support t h e agreement t o r e a s s i g n . " we cannot agree. With t h i s , The C i t y ' s w i l l i n g n e s s t o a l l o w t h e t r a n s f e r of t h e l e a s e i n t e r e s t and t o permit V i c t o r ' s , Inc. t o c o n t i n u e i n possession of t h e premises i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n s u f f i c i e n t o n l y t o o b l i g a t e v i c t o r ' s , Inc. t o pay t h e r e n t and a b i d e by t h e o t h e r g e n e r a l terms of t h e l e a s e , excluding t h e reassignment provision. I t s t r e t c h e s t h e imagination of f a i r n e s s t o s a y t h a t t h e C i t y ' s w i l l i n g n e s s t o a l l o w t h e t r a n s f e r of t h e l i c e n s e s t o V i c t o r ' s , Inc. (i.e., t o a l l o w v i c t o r ' s , I n c . t o pay f a i r market v a l u e f o r t h e l i c e n s e s t o a t h i r d p a r t y ) i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n f u l l y s u f f i c i e n t o r adequate t o f o r c e v i c t o r ' s , Inc. t o a s s i g n t h e licenses t o t h e City. I n examining t h e above two c o n t r a c t s and e s p e c i a l l y t h e r a t h e r s t a n d a r d l e a s e arrangement, t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n which supported them, we do n o t f i n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n ' t o support t h e assignment o f t h e l i c e n s e s t o t h e C i t y o r Dyneteria, Inc. The judgment of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i s r e v e r s e d and t h e cause remanded t o t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s t o determine f a i r market value of t h e l i c e n s e s t o b e paid V i c t o r ' s , I n c . , and t h e completion of t h e t r a n s a c t i o n i n accordance w i t h t h i s opinion.

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.