Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Swenson v. Decock (1994)

Citation
Swenson v. Decock (1994)
Parent Document
Swenson v. Decock (1994)
Jurisdiction
Montana (state)
Effective Date
1994-11-01

Full Text

1,265 chars
3
onto the lot.         His two daughters,   April   and Brenda DeCock,
testified that they did not know how the hydrant became plugged and
denied making any admissions to Swenson concerning how the hydrant
became     plugged.   Swenson testified that while the hydrant was
located in the DeCocks' front yard, the hydrant's plumbing was not
connected to their mobile home unit.    We conclude that the District
Court's decision that the DeCocks were not responsible for the
damage to the hydrant is         supported by substantial credible
evidence.
      Section 70-24-442, MCA,    allows the District Court to award
reasonable attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party in a
rental agreement dispute.    Based on our decision above, the DeCocks
were the prevailing party.     We conclude the District Court did not
err   in awarding attorney fees to the DeCocks rather than to
Swenson.
      We affirm the decision of the District Court.
      Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court
1988 Internal Operating Rules, this decision shall not be cited as
precedent and shall be published by its filing as a public document
with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and by a report of its result
to the State Reporter and West Publishing Company.