laid down rule in Montana

1958In the Prentice case, supra, 38 Mont. at page 117 , 98 Pac. at page 1083 , the court laid down the rule as follows: ‘ ‘ The United States and the State of Montana have recognized the right of an individual to acquire the use of water by appropriation [Citing statutes and cases.] but neither has authorized, nor, indeed, could authorize, one person to go upon the private property of another for the purpose of making an appropriation, except by condemnation proceedings.

1958In the Prentice case, supra, 38 Mont. at page 117 , 98 Pac. at page 1083 , the court laid down the rule as follows: ‘ ‘ The United States and the State of Montana have recognized the right of an individual to acquire the use of water by appropriation [Citing statutes and cases.] but neither has authorized, nor, indeed, could authorize, one person to go upon the private property of another for the purpose of making an appropriation, except by condemnation proceedings.

1958In the early case of Toohey v. Campbell, 24 Mont. 13, 17 , 60 Pac. 396 , this court laid down the rule that every appropriation of water must be made for a beneficial and useful purpose, and that it becomes the duty of the courts to try the question of the claimant’s intent by his acts and the circumstances surrounding his possession of the water, its actual or contemplated use, and the purposes thereof in order to determine whether there was a valid appropriation for beneficial *123 use.

1958In the early case of Toohey v. Campbell, 24 Mont. 13, 17 , 60 Pac. 396 , this court laid down the rule that every appropriation of water must be made for a beneficial and useful purpose, and that it becomes the duty of the courts to try the question of the claimant’s intent by his acts and the circumstances surrounding his possession of the water, its actual or contemplated use, and the purposes thereof in order to determine whether there was a valid appropriation for beneficial *123 use.

1954Ellinghouse v. Ajax Livestock Co., [ 51 Mont. 275 , 152 Pac. 481 , L.

1954Ellinghouse v. Ajax Livestock Co., [ 51 Mont. 275 , 152 Pac. 481 , L.

1954Co., 67 Mont. 386 , 216 Pac. 765, 767 , this court laid down the rule that “actionable negligence arises only from a breach of legal duty, and to state a cause of action for damages resulting from negligence the complaint must allege the duty, its breach, the resulting damages, and that the breach of duty was a proximate cause of the injury.

1954Co., 67 Mont. 386 , 216 Pac. 765, 767 , this court laid down the rule that “actionable negligence arises only from a breach of legal duty, and to state a cause of action for damages resulting from negligence the complaint must allege the duty, its breach, the resulting damages, and that the breach of duty was a proximate cause of the injury.

1941In Eisenberg v. Goldsmith, 42 Mont. 563 , 113 Pac. 1127 , it was in effect held that it was necessary that a person should have a personal interest in the mining claim or mine in order to be legally classified as a partner in any operations relating to the mine.

1941In Eisenberg v. Goldsmith, 42 Mont. 563 , 113 Pac. 1127 , it was in effect held that it was necessary that a person should have a personal interest in the mining claim or mine in order to be legally classified as a partner in any operations relating to the mine.

1941Co., 17 Mont. 519 , 43 Pac. 924 , this court laid down the rule that the foundation of the mining partnership depends upon the ownership of a share or interest in the mine.

1941Co., 17 Mont. 519 , 43 Pac. 924 , this court laid down the rule that the foundation of the mining partnership depends upon the ownership of a share or interest in the mine.

1937Rankin v. Martin, 68 Mont. 392 , 219 Pac. 632, 635 , this court said: “It will be remembered that long ago this court laid down the rule that — ‘ In determining whether the complaint states a cause of action or entitles plaintiff to any relief, matters of form are to be disregarded, as well as the allegations that are irrelevant and redundant; and if from any view the plaintiff is entitled to relief, the pleading will be sustained.’ ” (See, also, Dickason v. Dickason, 84 Mont. 52 , 274 Pac. 145 , and cases cited.) The allegation of the payment of interest was, in our opinion, sufficiently plea

1937Rankin v. Martin, 68 Mont. 392 , 219 Pac. 632, 635 , this court said: “It will be remembered that long ago this court laid down the rule that — ‘ In determining whether the complaint states a cause of action or entitles plaintiff to any relief, matters of form are to be disregarded, as well as the allegations that are irrelevant and redundant; and if from any view the plaintiff is entitled to relief, the pleading will be sustained.’ ” (See, also, Dickason v. Dickason, 84 Mont. 52 , 274 Pac. 145 , and cases cited.) The allegation of the payment of interest was, in our opinion, sufficiently plea

1937Rankin v. Martin, 68 Mont. 392 , 219 Pac. 632, 635 , this court said: “It will be remembered that long ago this court laid down the rule that — ‘ In determining whether the complaint states a cause of action or entitles plaintiff to any relief, matters of form are to be disregarded, as well as the allegations that are irrelevant and redundant; and if from any view the plaintiff is entitled to relief, the pleading will be sustained.’ ” (See, also, Dickason v. Dickason, 84 Mont. 52 , 274 Pac. 145 , and cases cited.) The allegation of the payment of interest was, in our opinion, sufficiently plea

1937Rankin v. Martin, 68 Mont. 392 , 219 Pac. 632, 635 , this court said: “It will be remembered that long ago this court laid down the rule that — ‘ In determining whether the complaint states a cause of action or entitles plaintiff to any relief, matters of form are to be disregarded, as well as the allegations that are irrelevant and redundant; and if from any view the plaintiff is entitled to relief, the pleading will be sustained.’ ” (See, also, Dickason v. Dickason, 84 Mont. 52 , 274 Pac. 145 , and cases cited.) The allegation of the payment of interest was, in our opinion, sufficiently plea

1923(Raymond v. Blancgrass, 36 Mont. 449 , 15 L.

1912La France Copper Co. v. District Court, 40 Mont. 206 , 105 Pac. 721 , this court laid down the rule that when a plaintiff has had one fair opportunity to make out his cause of action, and has failed, not on account of some technical omission or defect in the pleadings, but after a full' investigation of the issues as framed between the parties, this court will exercise its undoubted authority to order the cause dismissed, with a view to putting an end to the litigation.

1912La France Copper Co. v. District Court, 40 Mont. 206 , 105 Pac. 721 , this court laid down the rule that when a plaintiff has had one fair opportunity to make out his cause of action, and has failed, not on account of some technical omission or defect in the pleadings, but after a full' investigation of the issues as framed between the parties, this court will exercise its undoubted authority to order the cause dismissed, with a view to putting an end to the litigation.

1904The reasons therefor are discussed in the opinion of the court in that case, and are also elaborately discussed in People v. Wells, 100 Cal. 459 , 34 Pac. 1018 , and it is unnecessary to repeat the discussion here.