MCTAGGART v MONTANA POWER CO

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 14850 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1979 ROBERT E . McTAGGART , Petitioner and Respondent, VS . THE MONTANA POWER COMPANY, Respondent and Appellant. Appeal from: District Court of the First Judicial District, Honorable Nat Allen, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Corette, Smith, Dean, Pohlman and Allen, Butte, Montana Kendrick Smith argued, Butte, Montana For Respondent: Herron and Meloy, Helena, Montana Peter M. Meloy argued, Helena, Montana Submitted: Filed: November 1, 1979 J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e Court. Mr. T h i s i s an a c t i o n f o r t h e r e l o c a t i o n o f an o v e r h e a d u t i l i t y l i n e p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 MCA, t h r o u g h 69-4-404, i n t h e D i s t r i c t Court of t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l District, i n and f o r t h e County of L e w i s and C l a r k , t h e Honorable N a t Allen presiding. Respondent i s t h e owner of c e r t a i n r e a l a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o p e r t y i n Lewis and C l a r k County. A p p e l l a n t , t h e Montana Power Company, i s t h e owner of a n overhead u t i l i t y l i n e which c r o s s e s r e s p o n d e n t ' s p r o p e r t y . Respondent f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r t h e r e l o c a t i o n of t h e u t i l i t y l i n e p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 t h r o u g h 69-4-404, MCA, a l l e g i n g t h a t he d e s i r e d t o i n s t a l l a " c e n t e r p i v o t i r r i g a t i o n system" on h i s p r o p e r t y which would i n c r e a s e t h e p r o d u c t i v i t y of t h e l a n d from o n e - h a l f t o n of a l f a l f a p e r a c r e t o f i v e t o n s p e r a c r e . Respondent o f f e r e d a f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e f o r t h e r e l o c a t i o n o f t h e l i n e g i v i n g a p p e l l a n t a right-of-way to c o n t i n u e i t s o p e r a t i o n of t h e l i n e and a l l o w i n g r e s p o n d e n t t o i n s t a l l t h e new i r r i g a t i o n system. A motion t o d i s m i s s was f i l e d by a p p e l l a n t . Briefs w e r e s u b m i t t e d on t h e motion by b o t h p a r t i e s , and t h e motion was o v e r r u l e d . The motion t o d i s m i s s p r e s e n t e d a l t e r n a t i v e contentions t h a t the applicable s t a t u t e s w e r e unconstitut i o n a l b e c a u s e t h e y a l l o w e d a t a k i n g of p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y f o r p r i v a t e u s e , o r , i f t h e t a k i n g was f o r a p u b l i c u s e , t h e s t a t u t e s w e r e u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l b e c a u s e t h e r e was no j u s t compensation. Respondent f i l e d a motion f o r summary judgment, which was g r a n t e d by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t . The c o u r t found t h a t t h e r e would be a s u b s t a n t i a l improvement i n a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i v i t y by i n s t a l l i n g t h e i r r i g a t i o n system and t h a t t h e a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e o f f e r e d by r e s p o n d e n t f o r t h e r e l o c a t i o n o f t h e power l i n e was f e a s i b l e . found t h a t s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 The c o u r t f u r t h e r t h r o u g h 69-4-404, MCA, were c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and o r d e r e d a p p e l l a n t t o r e l o c a t e t h e u t i l i t y line. The c o s t s o f r e l o c a t i o n w e r e d i v i d e d e q u a l l y between the parties. A p p e l l a n t a p p e a l s from t h e summary judgment and o r d e r . The i s s u e s r a i s e d on a p p e a l s o l e l y c o n c e r n t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of t h e a p p l i c a b l e s t a t u t e s . I n p a r t i c u l a r , two issues are raised: (1) Whether s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 t h r o u g h 69-4-404, MCA, i n c l u s i v e , v i o l a t e t h e F o u r t e e n t h Amendment t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n and A r t i c l e 11, S e c t i o n 29, o f t h e 1972 Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n , i n t h a t t h e y a l l o w t h e t a k i n g o f p r i v a t e property f o r t h e p r i v a t e use of another? ( 2 ) Whether t h e u s e s o u g h t by r e s p o n d e n t i s a p u b l i c u s e , and i f s o , whether s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 MCA, t h r o u g h 69-4-404, i n c l u s i v e , a r e a v i o l a t i o n of t h e F o u r t e e n t h Amendment t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n and A r t i c l e 11, S e c t i o n 29, o f t h e 1972 Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n , b e c a u s e t h e y a l l o w t h e taking of p r i v a t e property f o r public use without j u s t compensation? The s t a t u t e s a p p l i c a b l e i n t h i s c a s e are s e t f o r t h i n s e c t i o n s 69-4-401 Annotated. t h r o u g h 69-4-404 o f t h e Montana Code S p e c i f i c a l l y , they provide: "69-4-401. Definitions. A s used i n t h i s p a r t , t h e f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n s a p p l y : (1) ' A g r i c u l t u r a l improvement' i n c l u d e s , w i t h o u t l i m i t a t i o n , s p r i n k l e r i r r i g a t i o n systems. ( 2 ) 'Overhead u t i l i t y l i n e ' means a f a c i l i t y f o r t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o r d i s t r i b u t i o n of e l e c t r i c i t y o r t e l e phone messages a l o n g w i r e s o r c a b l e s suspended above t h e ground between s i n g l e o r d o u b l e p o l e s and t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e a n c h o r s . "69-4-402. P e t i t i o n f o r r e l o c a t i o n o f overhead l i n e . An owner of a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d a c r o s s which a n o v e r h e a d u t i l i t y l i n e h a s been cons t r u c t e d may p e t i t i o n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t f o r a n o r d e r f o r r e l o c a t i o n o f t h e l i n e f o r t h e purpose o f i n s t a l l i n g a n a g r i c u l t u r a l improvement. The p e t i t i o n s h a l l s e t f o r t h t h e n a t u r e of t h e proposed a g r i c u l t u r a l improvement, t h e i n c r e a s e i n p r o d u c t i v i t y of t h e l a n d a n t i c i p a t e d t o r e s u l t from t h e improvement, and a f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e , a c r o s s o t h e r l a n d t o be p r o v i d e d by t h e p e t i t i o n e r a t no c o s t t o t h e owner of t h e o v e r head u t i l i t y l i n e . "69-4-403. Hearing and o r d e r . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t s h a l l , upon n o t i c e t o t h e owner o f t h e overhead u t i l i t y l i n e , hear evidence bearing upon t h e m a t t e r s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e p e t i t i o n . If t h e e v i d e n c e e s t a b l i s h e s a s u b s t a n t i a l improvement i n a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i v i t y and t h e f e a s i b i l i t y of t h e r e l o c a t e d r o u t e , t h e c o u r t s h a l l g r a n t o r modify and g r a n t , a s m o d i f i e d , t h e p e t i t i o n and o r d e r t h e owner of t h e l i n e t o relocate the line. "69-4-404. C o s t s of r e l o c a t i o n . The c o s t s o f r e l o c a t i n g a n overhead u t i l i t y l i n e a s o r d e r e d under 69-4-403 s h a l l be p a i d 50% by t h e u t i l i t y and 50% by t h e owner of t h e l a n d . However, i f t h e person p e t i t i o n i n g f o r t h e o r d e r f a i l s f o r any r e a s o n t o i n s t a l l t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l improvement w i t h i n 2 y e a r s f o l l o w i n g t h e d a t e r e l o c a t i o n i s completed, he must r e i m b u r s e t h e owner of t h e l i n e t h e f u l l c o s t o f r e l o c a t i o n , and t h e c o u r t has continuing j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e p a r t i e s f o r t h e p u r p o s e of o r d e r i n g s u c h reimbursement." Our f i r s t c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e abovequoted s t a t u t e s . On o n e hand, r e s p o n d e n t u r g e s t h a t t h e s t a t u t e s a r e an e x e r c i s e o f t h e p o l i c e power of t h i s s t a t e o v e r p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s and t h a t p r o p e r t y may t h e r e f o r e b e t a k e n w i t h o u t j u s t compensation. On t h e o t h e r hand, a p p e l - l a n t c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e s t a t u t e s as i n v o l v i n g t h e r i g h t of e m i n e n t domain, which a u t h o r i z e s t h e s t a t e t o t a k e p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y f o r p u b l i c u s e w i t h j u s t compensation. W e f i n d t h a t t h e s t a t u t e s sound i n e m i n e n t domain. Where t h e e x e r c i s e o f t h e p o l i c e power of t h e s t a t e i s d i r e c t l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h matters of p u b l i c h e a l t h , s a f e t y and w e l f a r e , we f i n d t h a t t h o s e matters a r e o n l y i n d i r e c t l y c o n c e r n e d , i f a t a l l , w i t h t h e m a t t e r s r a i s e d by t h e s t a t u t e s More i m p o r t a n t l y , w e n o t e t h a t t h e s t a t u t e s p r o v i d e here. f o r a " t a k i n g ' ! of p r o p e r t y w i t h o u t t h e c o n s e n t of a u t i l i t y . They i n v o l u n t a r i l y r e q u i r e a p u b l i c u t i l i t y t o move i t s power l i n e s and pay h a l f o f t h e c o s t s o f r e l o c a t i o n when a n owner o f farmland makes t h e n e c e s s a r y showings i n D i s t r i c t Court. T h a t b e i n g t h e c a s e , e m i n e n t domain, t h e r i g h t of t h e s t a t e t o t a k e p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y f o r p u b l i c u s e , and t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f e m i n e n t domain are a p p l i c a b l e h e r e . The f i r s t i s s u e c o n c e r n s whether t h e t a k i n g i s f o r a p u b l i c o r p r i v a t e use. I t i s fundamental t o t h e law of e m i n e n t domain t h a t p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y may n o t be t a k e n w i t h o u t a n o w n e r ' s c o n s e n t f o r t h e p r i v a t e u s e of a n o t h e r . S p r a t t v . Helena Power T r a n s m i s s i o n Company ( 1 9 0 8 ) , 37 Mont. 60, 94 P . 631; s e c t i o n 70-30-101, MCA. Both t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s and Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n s p r o h i b i t a t a k i n g by t h e s t a t e f o r merely p r i v a t e u s e . Mont. C o n s t . , Art. 11, §17. U.S. C o n s t . , Amend. X I V ; 1972 R a t h e r , f o r t h e r i g h t of eminent domain t o l i e , t h e u s e must be one which i s p u b l i c . The Montana l e g i s l a t u r e h a s by s t a t u t e d e c l a r e d s e v e r a l u s e s t o be p u b l i c i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e r i g h t of e m i n e n t domain. S e c t i o n 70-30-102, MCA. Among t h e u s e s enumerated are: ". . . t h e r i g h t of eminent domain may b e exercised i n behalf of t h e following public uses: . .. " (2) a l l other public uses authorized by t h e l e g i s l a t u r e o f t h i s s t a t e ; ... "(4) c a n a l s , d i t c h e s , flumes, aqueducts, and p i p e s f o r p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , supplyf a r m i n g neighborhoods w i t h water i n g I! ... H e r e , one o f t h e u s e s f o r which eminent domain i s s o u g h t i s t h e more e f f i c i e n t u s e o f w a t e r i n t h e i r r i g a t i o n o f farmland. Respondent d e s i r e s t o i n s t a l l a c e n t e r p i v o t s p r i n k l i n g system, r e c o g n i z e d a s a much more e f f i c i e n t method of i r r i g a t i o n t h a n methods s u c h a s f l o o d i n g . Appel- l a n t , w h i l e acknowledging t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y of such a system, a r g u e s t h a t such a u s e h a s n e v e r been s p e c i f i c a l l y d e c l a r e d t o be p u b l i c by t h e l e g i s l a t u r e . Where s u p p l y i n g a f a r m i n g neighborhood w i t h w a t e r i s a p u b l i c u s e , a p p e l l a n t m a i n t a i n s t h a t t h e means o f u s i n g w a t e r once it h a s been s u p p l i e d h a s n o t been r e c o g n i z e d a s a p u b l i c u s e . W e disagree. F i r s t , w e note s e v e r a l important provi- s i o n s which r e l a t e t o t h e u s e of w a t e r w i t h i n t h i s s t a t e . P e r h a p s t h e most i m p o r t a n t o f t h e s e i s a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n i n which t h e p e o p l e have d e c l a r e d t h a t t h e u s e of a l l w a t e r w i t h i n t h i s s t a t e s h a l l be deemed t o be a p u b l i c use. A r t i c l e I X , S e c t i o n 3 (1), of t h e 1972 Montana C o n s t i - t u t i o n , provides: "The u s e o f a l l w a t e r t h a t i s now o r may h e r e a f t e r be a p p r o p r i a t e f o r s a l e , r e n t , d i s t r i b u t i o n , o r o t h e r b e n e f i c i a l u s e , t h e r i g h t of way o v e r t h e l a n d s of o t h e r s f o r a l l d i t c h e s , d r a i n s , f l u m e s , c a n a l s , and a q u e d u c t s n e c e s s a r i l y used i n c o n n e c t i o n t h e r e w i t h and t h e s i t e s f o r reserv o i r s necessary f o r c o l l e c t i n g o r s t o r i n g water s h a l l be h e l d t o be a p u b l i c u s e . " Next, w e n o t e t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e Montana l e g i s l a t u r e w i t h r e s p e c t t o water. S e c t i o n 85-2-101, MCA, of t h e 1973 Montana Water U s e A c t , p r o v i d e s : " P u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e I X o f ' t h e Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n , t h e l e g i s l a t u r e d e c l a r e s t h a t any u s e of w a t e r i s a p u b l i c u s e and t h a t t h e w a t e r s w i t h i n t h e s t a t e a r e t h e p r o p e r t y o f t h e s t a t e and f o r t h e u s e of i t s p e o p l e . . ." S e c t i o n 85-2-101, MCA, t h i s state concerning water: a l s o e n u n c i a t e s t h e p o l i c y of ... " I t i s t h e p o l i c y of t h i s s t a t e t o encoura g e t h e w i s e u s e o f t h e s t a t e ' s water r e s o u r c e s by making them a v a i l a b l e f o r a p p r o p r i a t i o n cons i s t e n t w i t h t h i s c h a p t e r and t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e w i s e u t i l i z a t i o n , development and c o n s e r v a t i o n o f t h e w a t e r s o f t h e s t a t e f o r t h e maximum benef i t s of i t s p e o p l e w i t h t h e l e a s t p o s s i b l e deg r a d a t i o n o f t h e n a t u r a l a q u a t i c ecosystems. I n p u r s u i t of t h i s p o l i c y , t h e s t a t e encourages t h e development o f f a c i l i t i e s which s t o r e and conserve waters f o r b e n e f i c i a l use, f o r the maximization o f t h e u s e o f t h o s e waters i n Montana, f o r t h e s t a b i l i z a t i o n o f stream f l o w s , and f o r groundwater r e c h a r g e . " From t h e s e p r o v i s i o n s , w e b e l i e v e t h a t a more e f f i c i e n t u s e of w a t e r i n t h e i r r i g a t i o n o f farmland i s i n d e e d a p u b l i c u s e f o r which t h e r i g h t of e m i n e n t domain w i l l l i e . While t h i s u s e may n o t r e a d i l y conform t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l c o n c e p t of " p u b l i c u s e , " w e n o t e t h a t t e r m i s e l a s t i c and k e e p s p a c e w i t h changing c o n d i t i o n s . Domain S27, pp. 671-672. 26 Arn.Jur.2d Eminent Although i t i s t r u e t h a t t h e r e may be a p r i v a t e b e n e f i t t o r e s p o n d e n t h e r e i n t h a t t h e product i v i t y o f h i s l a n d w i l l be i n c r e a s e d , i t i s a l s o t r u e t h a t t h e r e w i l l be a b e n e f i t t o t h e p u b l i c . W f e e l compelled t o o b s e r v e t h e h i g h p r i o r i t i e s t h a t e have been p u t on t h e u s e of w a t e r by t h e p e o p l e of t h i s state. Water must be c o n s e r v e d and p u t t o t h e maximum b e n e f i t o f a l l t h o s e who u s e it. The mere f a c t t h a t o n e may r e a l i z e p r i v a t e p r o f i t i n p r o p e r t y s o u g h t t o be condemned d o e s n o t p r e v e n t t h e u s e from b e i n g d e c l a r e d p u b l i c . v . Helena Power T r a n s m i s s i o n Co. P. 631. Spratt ( 1 9 0 8 ) , 37 Mont. 60, 77, 94 Nor i s t h e mere number o f p e o p l e who a c t u a l l y make u s e of t h e p u b l i c u s e d e t e r m i n a t i v e of i t s c h a r a c t e r . This i s e s p e c i a l l y t r u e i n t h e c a s e of a r e c y c l a b l e r e s o u r c e . A u s e may be p u b l i c even though i t may be e n j o y e d a t c e r t a i n t i m e s by a c o m p a r a t i v e l y s m a l l number of p e o p l e . Eminent Domain S32, p. 681. W f i n d , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t a more e efficient use of water in the irrigation of farmland is a public use for which the right of eminent domain will lie. We note additionally that these statutes do not violate the rule that where property has already been taken for a public use, it may not be condemned again except for a more necessary public use. Cocoanougher v. Ziegler (1941), 112 Mont. 76, 81-82, 112 P.2d 1058, 1060; section 70-30-103!(c), MCA. Here, the statutes provide that the owner of land offer a feasible alternative route upon which the utility may plot its power line. Because the property is substi- tuted, it cannot be said to have been "doubly condemned." We have previously upheld substitute condemnation as a valid exercise of the power of eminent domain. See, State ex rel. De Puy v. District Court (1963), 142 Mont. 328, 384 P.2d 501, 20 A.L.R.3d 862, 868. Our decision today in no way involves a determination of whether the transportation of electricity or the efficient use of water has the higher priority in terms of public use. The second issue in this case involves whether there is just compensation. Section 69-4-404, MCA, provides that the costs of relocation shall be divided equally between the landowner and the owner of the power line. Appellant argues that the statute does not provide for just compensation. Appellant maintains that the principle of just compensation requires that the owner of condemned property be made whole for all of the damages sustained and that there must be full compensation. Appellant contends that 50 percent compensa- tion is only half of the compensation properly due appellant. With this proposition we fully agree. Article 11, Section 29, of the 1972 Montana constitution, states: " P r i v a t e p r o p e r t y s h a l l n o t be t a k e n o r damaged f o r p u b l i c u s e w i t h o u t j u s t compensation t o t h e -f u l l e x t e n t - -e l o s s h a v i n g been f i r s t made of t h t o o r p a i d i n t o t h e c o u r t f o r t h e owner." (Emp h a s i s added. ) This Court has a l s o held i n s e v e r a l c a s e s t h a t a landowner i n a condemnation a c t i o n s h o u l d be f a i r l y and f u l l y compensated, S t a t e v . P e t e r s o n ( 1 9 5 8 ) , 134 Mont. 52, 57, 328 P.2d 617, 620, and t h a t j u s t compensation i s d e t e r m i n e d by e q u i t a b l e p r i n c i p l e s , A l e x a n d e r v . S t a t e Highway Commission ( 1 9 6 6 ) , 147 Mont. 367, 371-72, 412 P.2d 414, 416. I n Alex- ander w e s t a t e d : " J u s t compensation i s d e t e r m i n e d by e q u i t a b l e I t s measure v a r i e s w i t h t h e f a c t s . principles. Where t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s w i l l n o t p e r m i t , t h e v a l u e o f p r o p e r t y c a n n o t be measured s o l e l y by formula o r a r t i f i c i a l r u l e . . ." Here, t h e r e i s j u s t compensation i n o n e s e n s e ; t h e u t i l i t y i s compensated f o r t h e e a s e m e n t which i t a l r e a d y has. The s t a t u t e s r e q u i r e t h a t t h e landowner o f f e r l a n d upon which t h e u t i l i t y may p l o t a n a l t e r n a t i v e r o u t e f o r i t s power l i n e . I t i s n o n e t h e l e s s a f a c t , however, t h a t t h e u t i l i t y must a l s o b e a r h a l f t h e c o s t o f r e l o c a t i o n . Where t h e l a n d i s condemned and t h e u t i l i t y h a s p a i d f o r t h e e a s e m e n t o n c e , w e t h i n k i t u n f a i r t h a t i t be r e q u i r e d t o pay f o r t h e easement again. The r e l o c a t i o n o f t h e power l i n e comes a t t h e i n s i s t e n c e o f t h e landowner, and i t i s h e who should properly bear t h e c o s t s of r e l o c a t i o n . t h e r e f o r e t h a t s e c t i o n 69-4-404, MCA, W e find does n o t provide f o r j u s t c o m p e n s a t i o n , and w e d e c l a r e i t u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . A c c o r d i n g l y , w e a f f i r m i n p a r t and r e v e r s e i n p a r t t h e judgment o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t and o r d e r t h a t r e s p o n d e n t pay t h e e n t i r e c o s t of r e l o c a t i n g t h e overhead u t i l i t y l i n e . We concur: Ceief 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.