There can be little doubt that defendants would be disadvantaged if plaintiff were allowed to prosecute its claims. In Leggroan, the court stated: This ease involves an excellent example of the type of stale claim statutes of limitation and laches are designed to prevent. Here the bank is required to account 16 years after the trust terminated and 10 years after final distribution. During that period, the defendant testified that records and accounts had become lost, destroyed or were inaccessible.... The trust officer of defendant bank, who was the only party in the bank familiar with this trust and who had personal knowledge of its history and the transactions pertaining to it, had died. 232 P.2d at 750; see also Johnson v. Estate of Shelton, 232 Mont. 85, 754 P.2d 828, 831 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Finally, plaintiff argues that even if laches
holding that a lessors interest can only be subject to liens arising from improvements performed on the leased property if the lease required the improvements or if under judicial interpretation the improvements were the pith of the lease holding the aggregate value of the land and its improvements is the controlling value holding that 35month delay created a presumption of prejudice without demonstration of specific cause holding that the lease at issue which set forth that the tenant may at its own expense make alterations and improvements did not require the lessee to make the improvements and that the alterations and improvements did not constitute the pith of the lease holding prejudice created by improvements to and conveyance of land during pendency of delay