No, 12798
I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF M N A A
OTN
1975
STATE OF MONTANA, on r e l a t i o n o f
CHARLES R. SWART,
R e l a t o r and A p p e l l a n t ,
CARL STUCKY, County C l e r k and Recorder
of t h e County of G a l l a t i n , S t a t e o f Montana,
Respondent and Respondent,
Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e E i g h t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t ,
Honorable W. W , L e s s l e y , Judge p r e s i d i n g .
Counsel o f Record :
For Appellant :
Chadwick H. Smith a r g u e d , Helena, Montana
F o r Respondent :
Thomas A . Olson, County A t t o r n e y , Bozeman, Montana
Donald C. White, Deputy County A t t o r n e y , a r g u e d ,
Bozeman, Montana
Submitted: A p r i l 25, 1975
~ ~ c i d e3Of3
d: I I 1975
M r . J u s t i c e John Conway Harrison d e l i v e r e d t h e 0pi.nion of t h e Court.
This i s an a p p e a l from t h e d e n i a l of a - c. !:-'i~damus
seeking t o compel t h e c l e r k and r e c o r d e r of Gal?.c.,:~,County t o
f i l e an instrument submitted : . ; zllant Charles R. Swart
pursuant : : ,:e,;,--i J - 11-3872, :
R . f. 1947.
T ': . s9re Charles R. Swart, a r e g i s t e r e d land
surveyor (i:,-.-r .-ni;iter r e f e r r e d t o a s a p p e l l a n t ) , and C a r l Stucky,
c l e r k and r e c o r d e r of G a l l a t i n County ( h e r e i n a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o
a s respondent).
The f a c t s can be summarized i n t h i s manner: Appellant
was h i r e d by one P r i s c i l l a Schutz t o complete a survey of a t r a c t
of land l o c a t e d i n G a l l a t i n County i n o r d e r t o complete a s a l e of
t h e property. O December 1 3 , 1973, a p p e l l a n t submitted t h e survey
n
t o t h e respondent f o r f i l i n g pursuant t o s e c t i o n 11-3872, t h e
p e r t i n e n t p o r t i o n o f which s t a t e s :
"(1) Within one hundred e i g h t y (180) days of t h e
completion o f a survey t h e r e g i s t e r e d land surveyor
responsibJe f o r t h e survey, whether he i s p r i v a t e l y
o r publid$employed, s h a l l prepare and f i l e f o r r e c o r d
a certificate of survey i n t h e county i n which t h e
survey was made i f t h e survey:
1I
( a ) provides m a t e r i a l evidence n o t appearing
on any map f i l e d w i t h t h e county c l e r k and r e c o r d e r
o r contained i n t h e r e c o r d s of t h e United S t a t e s
bureau of l a n d management I' * * *.
Respondent c l e r k and r e c o r d e r r e f u s e d t o a c c e p t t h e survey a s
submitted. He contended i t must f i r s t be submitted t o t h e c i t y
county planning board f o r i n s p e c t i o n and approval and b e accompanied
by a $20 reviewing f e e . O December 26, a p p e l l a n t resubmitted
n
t h e survey f o r f i l i n g w i t h t h e respondent without having i t
approved by t h e c i t y county planning board and was a g a i n r e f u s e d .
T h e r e a f t e r , a p p e l l a n t commenced t h i s a c t i o n i n t h e d i s t r i c t
c o u r t seeking a w r i t of mandamus t o compel respondent t o f i l e t h e
survey. A h e a r i n g was h e l d and on A p r i l 15, 1974, t h e d i s t r i c t
c o u r t e n t e r e d i t s f i n d i n g s of f a c t and conclusions of law. A
judgment i n favor of respondent was e n t e r e d on May 3 , 1974.
These a r e t h e i s s u e s a s p r e s e n t e d on a p p e a l by b o t h
parties :
1. Does respondent have a c l e a r l e g a l duty t o a c c e p t
f o r f i l i n g an instrument which r e p r e s e n t s a c e r t i f i c a t e of survey
on i t s f a c e without s u b j e c t i n g i t t o review and approval by t h e
c i t y county plahrting board o r o t h e r county o f f i c e r s ?
2. Is t h e $20 reviewing f e e proper?
3. I s t h i s a p p e a l moot?
The f i r s t i s s u e r e q u i r e s t h e review of p e r t i n e n t p r o v i s i o n s
of t h e Montana Subdivision and P l a t t i n g Act, s e c t i o n 11-3859, R.C.
M. 1947, e t seq. This Act was passed a s an a d j u n c t t o t h e p o l i c e
power of t h e l e g i s l a t u r e t o promote t h e p ~ *-public
~ eh e a l t h ,
s a f e t y , and g e n e r a l w e l f a r e through r e g u l a t i o n of t h e s u b d i v i s i o n
o f land i n Montana, and t o provide a method o f t r a n s f e r r i n g i n t e r e s t s
i n r e a l p r o p e r t y by r e f e r e n c e t o a " p l a t " o r a " c e r t i f i c a t e of
survey". S e c t i o n 11-3860. The county c l e r k and r e c o r d e r i s pro-
h i b i t e d from r e c o r d i n g any instrument which p u r p o r t s t o t r a n s f e r
t i t l e o r possession of a p a r c e l of land which i s r e q u i r e d t o be
surveyed u n l e s s t h e r e q u i r e d " c e r t i f i c a t e of survey" o r s u b d i v i s i o n
" p l a t " has been f i l e d and t h e instrument of t r a n s f e r d e s c r i b e s
t h e t r a c t by r e f e r e n c e t o t h e f i l e d " c e r t i f i c a t e of survey" o r
"plat". S e c t i o n 11-3862(3).
11
The terms c e r t i f i c a t e of survey", "plat", and "subdivision"
have important t e c h n i c a l meanings t h a t a r e e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e
d e f i n i t i o n s e c t i o n of t h e Act. P r i o r t o i t s amendment i n 1974,
s e c t i o n 11-3861, R.C.M.1947, stated:
"As used i n t h i s a c t , u n l e s s t h e c o n t e x t o r s u b j e c t
m a t t e r c l e a r l y r e q u i r e s o t h e r w i s e , t h e following
words o r phrases s h a l l have t h e following meanings:
"(1) ' C e r t i f i c a t e of s u r v e y ' means a drawing
o f a f i e l d survey prepared by a r e g i s t e r e d surveyor
f o r t h e purpose of d i s c l o s i n g f a c t s p e r t a i n i n g t o
boundary l o c a t i o n s .
I
"7
() Preliminary plat' means a neat and
scaled drawing of a proposed subdivision showing the
layout of streets, alleys, lots, blocks, and other
elements of a subdivision which furnish a basis for
review by a governing body; and the same shall be
accompanied by any proposed covenants to run with the
platted land and other elements of the proposed sub-
division required to furnish a basis of review by the
governing body.
"8
() 'Final plat' means the final drawing of
the subdivision and dedication prepared for filing for
record with the county clerk and recorder and con-
taining all elements and requirements set forth in
this act and in regulations adopted pursuant thereto.
"1)
(2 '~ubdivision' means the division of land,
or land so divided, into two (2) or more parcels, whether
contiguous or not, any of which is ten (10) acres or
less, exclusive of public roadways, in size, without re-
gard to the method of description thereof, in order that
the title or possession of the parcels or any interest
therein may be sold, rented, leased, or otherwise con-
veyed either immediately or in the future, and shall in-
clude any resubdivision of land; and shall further include
any condominium or areas providing multiple space for
camping trailers, house trailers or mobile homes * * *If.
The classification of the instrument as a subdivision "plat"
or as a "certificate of survey" is important since the Act requires
different treatment, depending upon the classification. If the
instrument is classified as a "plat", it must be submitted to the
city or town governing body for review and approval prior to filing.
The governing body can approve or reject the plat within 60 days
after it has been submitted and after a public hearing has been
held. Section 11-3866, R.C.M. 1947.
If the instrument is classified as a 11certificate of survey"
it need not be subjected to the procedure summarized above. However,
it must be filed pursuant to section 11-3872, R.C.M. 1947. This
is the statute under which appellant attempted to file his survey.
The instrument around which this lawsuit revolves is
entitled':
"A CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY OF A 44.293 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED
IN THE EAST HALF OF
SECTION 13, T2S, R4E, PMM,
It p l a i n l y shows t h a t t h e s i n g l e p a r c e l surveyed has an a r e a
composed of 44.293 a c r e s . I n t h e r i g h t h a n d c o m e r of t h e i n s t r u -
ment a p p e l l a n t c e r t i f i e d t h a t he made t h e survey and i t i s c o r r e c t l y
d e s c r i b e d by t h e document. In addition, appellant c e r t i f i e d that
t h e survey was made i n compliance w i t h a p p l i c a b l e s t a t e s t a t u t e s .
It
There i s no doubt t h a t a p p e l l a n t ' s document i s a certificate
of survey" and n o t a s u b d i v i s i o n " p l a t " a s d e f i n e d by t h e Act.
I t s purpose i s t o e s t a b l i s h boundaries and t h e p r o p e r t y d e s c r i p t i o n
f o r a deed on an e n t i r e s i n g l e p a r c e l which c o n t a i n s an a r e a g r e a t e r
than t h e 10 a c r e requirement e s t a b l i s h e d by s e c t i o n 11-3861(12),
p r i o r t o i t s amendment t o 20 a c r e s i n 1974. Furthermore, t h e
p r o f f e r e d document c o n t a i n s no " g r a p h i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of a
s u b d i v i s i o n showing t h e d i v i s i o n of land i n t o l o t s , p a r c e l s , s t r e e t s ,
and a l l e y s , and o t h e r d i v i s i o n s and d e d i c a t i o n s 1 ' w i t h i n t h e meaning
o f s e c t i o n 11-3861(6), which s e t s f o r t h t h e d e f i n i t i o n of a "plat".
Accordingly, we hold t h a t respondent had a c l e a r l e g a l d u t y
t o m p t a p p e l l a n t ' s document f o r f i l i n g s i n c e i t c o n t a i n e d no
evidence whatsoever t h a t would b r i n g i t w i t h i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f
a s u b d i v i s i o n , and t h e r e f o r e r e q u i r e d no review by t h e c i t y county
planning board p r i o r t o f i l i n g . The judgment of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t
i s r e v e r s e d t o a l l o w a p p e l l a n t a w r i t of mandamus t o compel respondent
t o perform h i s c l e a r l e g a l duty i n f i l i n g a p p e l l a n t ' s " c e r t i f i c a t e
I n h i s second i s s u e a p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t i t i s improper
f o r t h e c l e r k and r e c o r d e r t o a s s e s s a $20 reviewing f e e . W agree.
e
The Montana Subdivision and P l a t t i n g Act c o n t a i n s no
a u t h o r i t y f o r t h e assessment of a reviewing f e e , p r i o r t o t h e f i l i n g
o f a " c e r t i f i c a t e of survey". ?he. s o l e s t a t u t e d e a l i n g w i t h f e e s
i s s e c t i o n 11-3868, which provides:
1t
The governing body may e s t a b l i s h r e a s o n a b l e f e e s
t o b e W p a i dby-the s u b d i v i d e r t o d e f r a y t h e expense
of reviewing s u b d i v i s i o n p l a t s . " (Emphasis s u p p l i e d ) .
11
S e c t i o n 11-3868 i s c l e a r l y n o t a p p l i c a b l e where a certificate
of survey" i s submitted f o r f i l i n g . Under s t a t u t o r y a u t h o r i t y ,
respondent i s r e q u i r e d t o charge a s p e c i f i c f i l i n g f e e f o r f i l i n g
instruments. S e c t i o n 25-231, R.C.M. 1947. However, t h e r e i s no
I1
p r o v i s i o n t h a t would j u s t i f y t h e assessment of a reviewing f e e "
p r i o r t o t h e f i l i n g of a " c e r t i f i c a t e of survey". Neither t h e
county c l e r k and r e c o r d e r nor any o t h e r governmental a u t h o r i t y
may charge an a d d i t i o n a l f e e n o t p r e s c r i b e d by s t a t u t e , o r o t h e r -
wise a u t h o r i z e d . 76 C.J.S. Records 520, provides:
It
The amount of t h e f e e f o r r e c o r d i n g i s g e n e r a l l y
f i x e d by s t a t u t e , and only such f e e s a s a r e
a u t h o r i z e d may b e charged.
h he f e e f i x e d by s t a t u t e f o r f i l i n g a paper c o v e r s
every a c t n e c e s s a r y t o be done i n o r d e r t o complete
a l e g a l f i l i n g t h e r e o f , and no f e e may be charged
f o r doing any t h i n g i n connection w i t h t h e paper
not necessary t o a v a l i d f i l i n g . * * *".
The t h i r d i s s u e on a p p e a l is---Is t h i s a p p e a l moot?
Respondent argues t h i s a p p e a l i s moot because:
1. Section 11-3867, R.C.M. 1947, was amended i n 1974
t o provide f o r t h e p r e r e c o r d i n g review of " c e r t i f i c a t e s of survey".
2. Since t h i s a c t i o n was i n i t i a t e d a surveyor has been
h i r e d t o r e p l a c e a p p e l l a n t and he has a l l e g e d l y f i l e d a " c e r t i f i c a t e
of survey" on t h e same p r o p e r t y .
To f u l l y understand r e s p o n d e n t ' s f i r s t c o n t e n t i o n , we
t u r n t o s e c t i o n 11-3867, R.C.M. 1947, p r i o r t o i t s 1974 amendment:
"(1) A l l f i n a l s u b d i v i s i o n p l a t s s h a l l b e reviewed
f o r e r r o r s and omissions i n c a l c u l a t i o n o r d r a f t i n g
by an examining land surveyor * * *. When t h e survey
d a t a s h o ~ mon t h e p l a t meet t h e c o n d i t i o n s s e t f o r t h
by o r pursuant t o t h i s a c t , t h e examining surveyor
s h a l l so c e r t i f y i n a p r i n t e d o r stamped c e r t i f i c a t e
on t h e p l a t ; such c e r t i f i c a t e s h a l l b e signed by him."
(Emphasis s u p p l i e d ) .
I n 1974, a f t e r t h i s a c t i o n was i n i t i a t e d , s e c t i o n 11-3867
was amended t o provide:
"(1) The governing body may r e q u i r e t h a t f i n a l sub-
d i v i s i o n p l a t s and c e r t i f i c a t e s of survey be reviewed
f o r e r r o r s and omissions i n c a l c u l a t i o n o r d r a f t i n g by
an examining land surveyor b e f o r e r e c o r d i n g w i t h
t h e county c l e r k and r e c o r d e r . When t h e survey
d a t a shown on t h e p l a t o r c e r t i f i c a t e of survey
meet t h e c o n d i t i o n s s e t f o r t h by o r pursuant t o
t h i s a c t , t h e examining land surveyor s h a l l s o
c e r t i f y i n a p r i n t e d o r stamped c e r t i f i c a t e on t h e
p l a t o r c e r t i f i c a t e of survey; such c e r t i f i c a t e s h a l l
be signed by him. * * *." (Emphasis s u p p l i e d ) .
W a g r e e w i t h respondent t h a t s e c t i o n 11-3867 a s amended,
e
provides f o r t h e p r e r e c o r d i n g review of c e r t i f i c a t e s of survey.
However, we apply t h e law a s i t e x i s t e d when t h i s a c t i o n was brought.
Consequently, we cannot c o n s i d e r t h e e f f e c t of t h e amended s t a t u t e .
This a p p e a l i s n o t moot because of t h e 1974 amendment t o s e c t i o n
11-3867. Peterson v. Livestock Commission, 120 Mont. 140, 181 P.2d
152.
11
Respondent a l s o a r g u e s t h i s a p p e a l i s moot because a certi-
f i c a t e of surveyt' h a s a l l e g e d l y been f i l e d by one Lewis Tout, a
surveyor h i r e d t o r e p l a c e a p p e l l a n t a f t e r he was prevented from
f i l i n g h i s " c e r t i f i c a t e of survey". Again, we d i s a g r e e t h a t t h i s
a l l e g e d f a c t r e n d e r s t h i s m a t t e r moot.
S e c t i o n 11-3872(1)(a), provides t h a t a r e g i s t e r e d surveyor
i s compelled t o p r e p a r e and f i l e a c e r t i f i c a t e of survey i f t h e
survey
"(a) provides m a t e r i a l evidence n o t appearing on
any map f i l e d w i t h t h e county c l e r k and r e c o r d e r
o r contained i n t h e r e c o r d s of t h e United S t a t e s
bureau of land management. I 1
Appellant a r g u e s t h e c e r t i f i c a t e o f survey f i l e d by Tout
i s n o t i d e n t i c a l t o t h e survey he attempted t o f i l e and t h a t h i s
survey 'I d i s c l o s e s evidence m a t e r i a l n o t appearing on any map
f i l e d w i t h t h e c l o u n t y c l e r k and r e c o r d e r . " Assuming t h a t Tout
d i d f i l e a c e r t i f i c a t e of survey, a f a c t which does n o t appear
i n t h e r e c o r d b e f o r e u s , i t i s r e s p o n d e n t ' s duty t o demonstrate
t h e two surveys a r e i n f a c t i d e n t i c a l , and t h a t i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y
f o r a p p e l l a n t t o f i l e h i s survey i n o r d e r t o make t h i s m a t t e r moot.
This respondent has n o t done. T h e r e f o r e , respondent's second argu-
ment i n r e g a r d t o mootness must f a i l .
The judgment of the district court is reversed with
directions to grant the writ of mandamus and award attorney
fees to appellant in the amount of $1,000.
We Concur:
- - - L - * P - - " I - " - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Chief Justice
/ Justices.
4