§ 70-25-201

Citation: § 70-25-201
Parent Document: Solem v. Chilcote, 906 P.2d 209 (1995)
Jurisdiction: Montana (state)
Effective Date: 1995-11-21
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/883453/solem-v-chilcote/ ↗

Full Text

2,444 chars

absent      an abuse of the court's                          discretion.               Sage v. Rogers               (1993)
257 Mont.          229,        242,       848 P.2d            1034,           1042.          The District               Court
awarded attorney               fees to the tenants                      for    those      fees associated                with
the     recovery         of     the      tenants'           security           deposit.             The court            then
ordered      the tenants              to file       an affidavit               of those        fees     and provided
for     a period          of      time      in      which        the      landlord           may object            to       the
tenants'         claim        and request            a hearing.                 We conclude            the       District
Court      did    not abuse its                discretion           in its        award of attorney                     fees,
and therefore            hold      that        the District             Court      did not err           in awarding
attorney         fees    to the tenants.
                                                         Issue      4
         Is the landlord                 entitled           to the return              of his       appeal        bond?
        The landlord              requests           this     Court           to order        the     return       of his
appeal      bond in           the amount of                 $2000.            The District            Court       did     not
respond      to the landlord's                    motions          to return          the appeal         bond to him
though      the     judgment           had been executed,                      and thus,         the appeal              bond
has     remained          filed        with        the      Justice           Court.           The tenants               have
conceded         the validity             of      the landlord's                 claim       to the bond and we
conclude         that    the landlord               is entitled               to return         of the bond.
        We affirm             in part,         reverse         in part,           and direct           the District
Court      to order           the Justice            Court         to return           the     $2000 bond to the
landlord. Justice 13
We concur: 14

Other Sections in This Document (40)

Full Text