Gosnay v. Big Sky Owners Ass'n

MR. JUSTICE SHEA,

specially concurring:

I join the opinion of the Court but have a few comments on the findings and conclusions entered in this case.

In their appeal the defendants also claim that the trial court adopted virtually verbatim if not entirely verbatim, the proposed findings and conclusions of the plaintiffs *230counsel. Plaintiffs counsel does not dispute this claim. From time to time the trial courts have been quite critical of the decisions of agencies and boards where the reasons for their decisions are not set forth in the orders of the agencies involved. It seems to me that the trial courts have really no reason to be critical of agency decisions when the trial courts simply rubber stamp the proposed findings and conclusions of the party that they believe should win the lawsuit. This practice hardly bespeaks of a careful, considered analysis of the evidence and the law.The parties, counsel, and the public are entitled from the trial courts to more than the duplicating of proposed findings and conclusions presented by a partisan to the cause. Of course I know that my view of the evils of verbatim parroting of findings and conclusions does not hold sway for too long in this Court, but I will continue to adhere to this view.