Martin v. Artis
2012 MT 249
Mont.2012Background
- Martin sues Keith and Gloria Artis alleging nuisance and trespass based on a tree on Artis’ property that obstructs Martin’s view and encroaches over the boundary fence.
- Artis’ property lies directly below and abuts Martin’s; a boundary fence separates the parcels.
- Martin asserts the tree blocks substantial portions of his view of the city, valley, and mountains and cites a specific Independence Day fireworks display as example.
- He claims the tree’s obstruction diminishes the aesthetic/monetary value of his property and interferes with his use and enjoyment.
- He further alleges roots encroach onto his property and buckle the boundary fence; the tree allegedly encroaches over the shared boundary.
- The District Court dismissed the complaint for failing to state a claim; the Montana Supreme Court reviews de novo and construes the complaint in the plaintiff’s favor for dismissal challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the nuisance claim based on a naturally growing tree could state a nuisance under Montana law. | Martin contends the tree’s obstruction constitutes a nuisance under § 27-30-101(1), MCA. | Artis argues no right to an unobstructed view exists and the tree’s natural growth cannot be a nuisance. | Nuisance claim properly dismissed. |
| Whether the trespass claim based on encroachment of the tree and roots stated a claim. | Martin alleges the tree overhangs the boundary fence and roots encroach onto his property. | Artis disputes intent to trespass and argues lack of improper act. | Trespass claim states a claim; reversed as to this claim and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Tarlton v. Kaufman, 348 Mont. 178 (2008 MT 462) (nuisance standard; cautions against limiting nuisance definition)
- Barnes v. City of Thompson Falls, 979 P.2d 1275 (1999 MT 77) (nuisance per se vs. per accidens framework; distinguishes unsightliness/view obstruction)
- Branstetter v. Beaumont Supper Club, 727 P.2d 933 (Mont. 1986) (trespass elements; intent required for entry or possession)
- Tally Bissell Neighbors, Inc. v. Eyrie Shotgun Ranch, LLC, 228 P.3d 1134 (2010 MT 63) (trespass liability without requisite damages; entry/remains on land)
- Rooney v. City of Cut Bank, 286 P.3d 241 (2012 MT 149) (de novo review of dismissal; factual allegations presumed true)
- Fellows v. Office of Water Comm’r, 258 P.3d 448 (2012 MT 169) (construction of complaints; favorable view for plaintiff on motion to dismiss)