School Trust v. State ex rel. Bd. Of Com'rs
Decision Date | 02 November 1999 |
Docket Number | No. 98-535.,98-535. |
Citation | 989 P.2d 800,1999 MT 263 |
Court | Montana Supreme Court |
Parties | MONTANANS FOR THE RESPONSIBLE USE OF THE SCHOOL TRUST, Plaintiff, Respondent, and Cross-Appellant, v. STATE of Montana, ex rel. BOARD OF LAND COMMISSIONERS and Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Defendants, Appellants, and Cross-Respondents. |
Tommy H. Butler (argued), Special Assistant Attorney General, Montana Department of Natural Resources & Conservation, Helena, Montana, for Appellants.
Roy H. Andes (argued), Attorney at Law, Missoula, Montana, for Respondent.
David J. Dietrich (argued); Dietrich Law Offices, Billings, Montana, for Montana Leaseholders Association.
Mark L. Stermitz, Montana Appleseed Center for Law & Justice, Missoula, Montana, Amicus.
¶ 1 The State of Montana (hereafter, the State), appeals from the judgment and order of the First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County. Respondent Montanans for the Responsible Use of the School Trust (hereafter, Montrust) cross-appeal the judgment of the District Court.
¶ 2 We affirm in part and reverse in part.
¶ 3 The parties raise the following issues:
¶ 4 1. Whether the District Court erred in concluding that § 77-1-130, MCA, is unconstitutional.
¶ 5 2. Whether the District Court erred in concluding that the Department's rental policy for cabin site licenses and leases under § 77-1-208, MCA, is unconstitutional.
¶ 6 3. Whether the District Court correctly determined that § 77-1-208, MCA, does not violate the trust.
¶ 7 4. Whether the District Court erred in concluding that § 77-5-211, MCA, violates the State's fiduciary duties regarding school trust lands.
¶ 8 5. Whether the District Court erred in concluding that § 77-6-304, MCA, is constitutional.
¶ 6. Whether the District Court erred in concluding that § 77-6-305, MCA, is constitutional.
¶ 10 7. Whether the District Court abused its discretion in denying Montrust reasonable attorney fees.
¶ 11 We review a district court's conclusions of law to determine whether they are correct. Steer, Inc. v. Dept. of Revenue (1990), 245 Mont. 470, 474-75, 803 P.2d 601, 603. Statutes are presumed to be constitutional and it is the duty of the Court to avoid an unconstitutional interpretation if possible. State v. Nye (1997), 283 Mont. 505, 510, 943 P.2d 96, 99 (citations omitted). A party challenging the constitutionality of a statute State v. Martel (1995), 273 Mont. 143, 148, 902 P.2d 14, 17 (citations omitted). A statute will be "upheld on review except when proven to be unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt." Davis v. Union Pacific R. Co. (1997), 282 Mont. 233, 239, 937 P.2d 27, 30.
¶ 12 In February, 1997 Montrust filed a complaint challenging the constitutionality of fourteen statutes that concern Montana's school trust lands and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. In May, 1997 Montrust filed an amended complaint. Following a hearing in May, 1997 the District Court issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the State from issuing deeds for historic rights of way on school trust lands under House Bill 607 (codified as § 77-1-130, MCA) and from leasing or disposing of school trust lands under § 20-6-621, MCA. A hearing was held in October, 1997, and the District Court issued its Decision, Order and Permanent Injunction in April, 1998. Concluding that ten of the statutes challenged by Montrust violated Montana's Enabling Act and Constitution and that another statute was invalid as applied, the District Court permanently enjoined eleven statutes. In June, 1998 the District Court awarded Montrust costs of $312 but denied Montrust attorney fees. The State appeals the District Court's permanent injunction of three statutes. Montrust cross-appeals the District Court's ruling on three other statutes and the District Court's denial of attorney fees.
¶ 13 Under the Act of February 22, 1889 (hereafter, the Enabling Act), ch. 180, 25 Stat. 676 (1889), the federal government granted Montana the sixteenth and thirty-sixth sections of each township in Montana "for the support of common schools." Section 10 of the Enabling Act.1 The federal government's grant of those lands to Montana constitutes a trust (hereafter, the trust). See Rider v. Cooney (1933), 94 Mont. 295, 306-07, 23 P.2d 261, 263 (citations omitted). The terms of the trust are set forth in Montana's Constitution and the Enabling Act. See Art. XVII, Sec. 1, Mont. Const.(1889) ( )(emphasis added); Department of State Lands v. Pettibone (1985), 216 Mont. 361, 366, 702 P.2d 948, 951 ) (citations omitted).
¶ 14 The State of Montana is a trustee of those lands (hereafter, the school trust lands). See, e.g., Toomey v. State Board of Land Com'rs (1938), 106 Mont. 547, 559, 81 P.2d 407, 414; State v. Stewart (1913), 48 Mont. 347, 349, 137 P. 854, 855. Further, "The state board of land commissioners, as the instrumentality created to administer that trust, is bound, upon principles that are elementary, to so administer it as to secure the largest measure of legitimate advantage to the beneficiary of it." Stewart, 48 Mont. at 349-50, 137 P. at 855. The State Board of Land Commissioners (hereafter, the Board) "owe[s] a higher duty to the public than does an ordinary businessman." State v. Babcock (1966), 147 Mont. 46, 54, 409 P.2d 808, 812. Finally, Montana's Constitutional provisions are "limitations on the power of disposal by the legislature." Rider, 94 Mont. at 307, 23 P.2d at 263. One limitation on the legislature's power of disposal is the trust's requirement that full market value be obtained for trust lands. See Section 11 of the Enabling Act ( )(providing that "none of such lands . . . shall ever be disposed of . . . unless the full market value of the estate or interest disposed of, to be ascertained in such manner as may be provided by law, has been paid or safely secured to the State").
¶ 15 With the foregoing as background, we note the pertinent provisions of the Enabling Act and Montana's Constitution. The Enabling Act provides in part:
Section 11 of the Enabling Act ( ).
¶ 16 Article X, Section 4 of Montana's Constitution provides:
Board of land commissioners. The governor, superintendent of public instruction, auditor, secretary of state, and attorney general constitute the board of land commissioners. It has the authority to direct, control, lease, exchange, and sell school lands and lands which have been or may be granted for the support and benefit of the various state educational institutions, under such regulations and restrictions as may be provided by law.
¶ 17 Article X, Section 11 further provides:
¶ 18 As a preliminary matter, we note that the parties disagree over the standard of review in the present case. The State urges that this Court should determine whether the legislation in question "irrevocably" conflicts with the Board's fiduciary duties as a trustee "in any conceivable instance" and whether the Board may constitutionally apply the legislation. Montrust argues rather that there are two essential inquiries: whether the legislation comports with the Montana Constitution, and whether the legislation is preempted by the Enabling Act....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sunburst School Dist. No. 2 v. Texaco, Inc.
...doctrine. We will not overturn a district court's award of attorney's fees absent an abuse of discretion. See School Trust v. State ex rel. Bd. Of Com'rs, 1999 MT 263, ¶ 68, 296 Mont. 402, ¶ 68, 989 P.2d 800, ¶ 68 ¶ 88 Montana adheres to the "American Rule" concerning attorney's fees. Finke......
-
Baxter v. State
...the government fails to properly enforce interests which are significant to its citizens. Montanans for the Responsible Use of the Sch. Trust v. State ex rel. Bd. of Land Commissioners, 1999 MT 263, ¶ 64, 296 Mont. 402, 421, 989 P.2d 800, 811. The private attorney general doctrine, however,......
-
Dorwart v. Caraway
...nor brief their entitlement to attorney's fees pursuant to the private attorney general theory which we adopted in School Trust v. State ex rel. Bd. of Com'rs, 1999 MT 263, ¶ 67, 296 Mont. 402, ¶ 67, 989 P.2d 800, ¶ 67. Therefore, we will not consider Plaintiffs' claim for attorney's fees o......
-
PPL MONTANA, LLC v. State
...trust lands and that PPL was obligated to compensate the State for their use. In Montanans for the Responsible Use of the School Trust v. State, 1999 MT 263, 296 Mont. 402, 989 P.2d 800 (Montrust), we defined "school trust lands" as state-owned public lands which the State Land Board (Land ......
-
Procedural Rights
...v. Arizona Dep’t of Health Servs., 775 P.2d 521 (Ariz. 1989) (same); Montanans for the Responsible Use of the School Trust v. Montana, 989 P.2d 800 (1999) (adopting the Serrano test to find that the district court abused its discretion in denying attorney fees to a public interest litigant ......
-
Managing Montana's trust lands.
...2003b. Return on Asset Report. Helena, MT. --Montanans for Responsible Use of School Trust v. State ex rel. Bd. of Land Commissioners, 989 P.2d 800, 296 Mont. 402, (Mont. --Mortimer, Michael J. 1999. "Condemnation Without Compensation: How Environmental Eminent Domain Diminishes the Value o......