[DOWNLOAD] "Langen v. Grazing Dist." by Supreme Court of Montana " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Langen v. Grazing Dist.
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 31, 1951
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 58 KB
Description
1. Public lands ? Purpose of Grass Conservation Act. The Grass Conservation Act was enacted for purpose of providing for conservation, protection, restoration and proper utilization of the grass, forage and range resources, not only of federal lands, but of state, county and private lands, and for better stabilization of the livestock industry and thereby the communities, the counties in which districts were located, and the state at large. 2. Administrative law and procedure ? Effect of review by District Court. The review by the district court of a decision of Grass Conservation Commission with respect to grazing rights under the Grass Conservation Act is only for purpose of determining legal rights of parties involved. 3. Administrative law and procedure ? Delegation of Powers. A statute which attempts to place court in place of a commission or board to try a matter anew as an administrative body is unconstitutional as a delegation to the judiciary of non-judicial powers. 4. Administrative law and procedure ? Extent of Review by District and Supreme Court. The district court and the Supreme Court will only inquire in so far as to ascertain if the commission has stayed within the statutory bounds and has not acted arbitrarily, capriciously or unlawfully. 5. Administrative law and procedure ? Commission decision should not be disturbed. Where there was no evidence by cattle grazer that he had class one grazing rights or that he had class one preference for certain number of animal units in co-operative state grazing district, and there was no evidence whatever that he ever made application for grazing rights or permit or non-use permit within statutory time limit of one year from time of effective date of the Grass Conservation Act, and there was no evidence whatever that he was ever a member of the district, decision of the Grass Conservation Commission affirming decision of district in disallowing grazers applications for preferred grazing rights should not be disturbed by court. 6. Public lands ? Knowledge of law ? burden on applicant. Burden was on cattle grazer to know the law and to take such action at the proper time as would protect any rights which he might have under the Grass Conservation Act.