Grenfell v. Anderson, 1999 MT 272 (1999)

Citation: Grenfell v. Anderson, 1999 MT 272 (1999)
Parent Document: Grenfell v. Anderson, 1999 MT 272 (1999)
Jurisdiction: Montana (state)
Effective Date: 1999-11-09
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/884898/grenfell-v-anderson/ ↗

Full Text

901 chars

¶ We agree with the District Court that under such circumstances, a party may not "escape the effect of the
giving of a written notice by refusing to receive it when it is presented in person as a notice." 58 Am.Jur.2d
Notice § 33 (1989). Accordingly, the District Court was correct in finding that "a person may not profit from his
own wrongful act." We further conclude, however, that in the context of giving notice by certified mail, this rule
requires an actual refusal to accept. On this point, we must turn to other jurisdictions for guidance. See Long v.
Crum (Iowa 1978), 267 N.W.2d 407, 411; Helland v. Larson (Ill. App. 1985), 485 N.E.2d 457, 459-60 (applying the
rule that refusal to accept certified letter constituted constructive receipt of notice); Hignell v. Gebala (Cal. App.
1949), 202 P.2d 378, 382 (concluding that defendant was bound by notice although she refused to accept it).

Other Sections in This Document (105)

Full Text