- 18 -
rules), we believe that those requirements are inherent in
Montana’s three-part test. Since the parties have couched their
arguments in terms of the Peck requirements, we shall respond
accordingly.
III. Discussion
A. Issue Preclusion
1. The Abagail Ranch
Cause No. 96-109 is an action brought by Ms. Williams to
quiet title to the Abagail ranch. Such actions are provided for
by Mont. Code Ann. ch. 28 (1999) (Quieting Title to Real
Property). In pertinent part, Mont. Code Ann. sec. 70-28-101
(1999) provides:
Quiet title action authorized. An action may be
brought * * * by any person * * * claiming title to
real estate against any person or persons, both known
and unknown, who claim or may claim any right, title,
estate, or interest therein or lien or encumbrance
thereon adverse to plaintiff’s ownership * * * for the
purpose of determining such claim or possible claim
and quieting the title to said real estate.
In pertinent part, Mont. Code Ann. sec. 70-28-107 (1999)
provides:
the court in which such action is tried shall have
jurisdiction to make a complete adjudication of the
title to the lands named in the complaint * * *,
including jurisdiction to direct:
* * * * * * *
(d) the doing of any * * * act of a personal
nature necessary to give effect to the rights of the
respective parties to such action, as the same may be
adjudicated by the court.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011