Benintendi v. Hein, 265 P.3d 1239

The Heins rented a house from Benintendi and the Perkerewiczes; the Heins vacated in March 2008 and B&P retained a $1,100 security deposit for alleged damages.
B&P filed suit in 2009; after expedited attempts at settlement, default was entered against the Heins without proper service of the affidavit/request for default.
B&P obtained a default judgment, which the district court later set aside; a jury trial followed in January 2011 resulting in a verdict for B&P of $2,281.19 and a separate $1,465.96 recouped earlier.
B&P sought attorney fees of $20,680 and costs of $1,148.19; the Heins sought $5,000 in fees and $763.72 in costs.
The district court denied attorney fees, found the fee clause in the rental agreement inapplicable to the dispute, and awarded no fees or limited costs; the court later set aside the default judgment and ordered further proceedings.
On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmatively upheld denial of attorney fees, reversed the denial of costs, and affirmed the order setting aside the default judgment, remanding for costs determination.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Attorney fees: whether the district court properly denied fees.	B&P argue the fee clause governs and should apply to prevailing party.	Heins contend the clause only covers eviction and the court correctly exercised discretion under the statute.	Fees denied; discretionary denial affirmed.
Costs: whether the district court properly denied costs to B&P.	Because B&P prevailed on the verdict, they should recover costs under § 25-10-101, MCA.	Costs should be limited due to related actions and non-prevailing portions.	Costs awarded to B&P on remand; district court erred in denying costs.
Default judgment: whether the district court abused its discretion in setting aside the default.	B&P argue that Heins had notice and defense but failed diligence; four-factor Blume test favors denial of setting aside.	Heins contend lack of notice, miscommunication, and meritorious defense justify setting aside under Blume.	District court did not abuse discretion; set aside affirmed.

Old Fashioned Baptist Church v. Mont. Dept. of Revenue, 671 P.2d 625 (Mont. 1983) (fee-claim scope and ambiguity in tax/fee rulings)
Plath v. Schonrock, 64 P.3d 984 (Mont. 2003) (seven factors for attorney-fee reasonableness)
Bryden v. Lakeside Ventures, LLC, 218 P.3d 61 (Mont. 2009) (good-cause standard for setting aside default judgments)
Hoff v. Lake Co. Abstract & Title Co., 255 P.3d 137 (Mont. 2011) (abuse-of-discretion standard for setting aside defaults)
Engelsberger v. Lake Co., 167 P.3d 902 (Mont. 2007) (setting aside default judgments; factors and diligence)
Hughes v. Ahlgren, 258 P.3d 439 (Mont. 2011) (standard for reviewing district-court decisions on attorney fees)