Case Title: STANDING BEAR v BELCOURT

Citation: 

Docket Number: 80-390

State: montana

Court: Montana Supreme Court

Date: 1981-07-09T00:00:00Z

Document:
No. 80-390 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA THE ESTATE OF DOUGLAS J. STANDING BEAR, Deceased, by and through CORRINE BILLY, Personal Representative, Plaintiff and Appellant, GERALD BELCOURT, JEAN BELCOURT, and LEOTA M . STANDING BEAR, Defendants and Respondents. Appeal from: District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, In and for the County of Hill. Honorable B.W. Thomas, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Altman & Lilletvedt, Havre, Montana Frank Altman argued, Havre, Montana For Respondents: Wm. George Harris, Missoula, Montana \ I \ \ :\ - Filed: 1981 Submitted: June 16, 1981 Decided : J l d g $ . . I C J g ! Mr. J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. P l a i n t i f f i s t h e p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e e s t a t e of Douglas J. Standing Bear. She a p p e a l s from an o r d e r o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t o f t h e T w e l f t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , i n and f o r t h e County of H i l l , d i s m i s s i n g f o r l a c k of s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n her a c t i o n i n c l a i m and d e l i v e r y t o recover a road g r a d e r a l l e g e d t o be p r o p e r t y of t h e e s t a t e . Douglas Standing Bear was k i l l e d i n a c a r a c c i d e n t on J u l y 22, 1978. He was, and h i s t h r e e n a t u r a l c h i l d r e n a r e , e n r o l l e d members of t h e Wind River Arapaho I n d i a n T r i b e i n Wyoming. H i s w i f e , d e f e n d a n t Leota M . Standing Bear, and h i s adopted d a u g h t e r , T e r e s a S t a n d i n g Bear, a r e e n r o l l e d members of t h e Chippewa-Cree T r i b e i n Montana. A t t h e t i m e of h i s d e a t h , d e c e d e n t , h i s w i f e , and t h r e e of t h e c h i l d r e n were domiciled on t h e Rocky Boy's I n d i a n R e s e r v a t i o n . The f o u r t h c h i l d was l i v i n g i n Havre, Montana. On October 1, 1976, t h e Bureau of I n d i a n A f f a i r s approved an I n d i a n Business Development Grant t o decedent i n t h e amount of $30,000 f o r t h e purchase of a motor g r a d e r s o t h a t he could s t a r t a p r i v a t e c o n t r a c t i n g b u s i n e s s . The g r a n t r e q u i r e d t h a t decedent o b t a i n 60 p e r c e n t of t h e c o s t of t h e g r a d e r from o t h e r s o u r c e s . He a p p l i e d f o r and r e c e i v e d a $54,000 l o a n from t h e F i r s t N a t i o n a l Bank of Havre and a g u a r a n t y f o r t h a t l o a n from t h e Small B u s i n e s s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . The Havre bank o b t a i n e d a p e r f e c t e d s e c u r i t y i n t e r e s t i n t h e g r a d e r . Upon d e c e d e n t ' s d e a t h , a c r e d i t l i f e i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y p a i d t h e l o a n b a l a n c e t o t h e bank. On August 9 , 1978, upon a p p l i c a t i o n of Leota Standing Bear ( d e c e d e n t ' s widow), s h e was appointed a s p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of her husband's e s t a t e and j u r i s d i c t i o n p l a c e d i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t o f t h e T w e l f t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , County of H i l l . Leota M . S t a n d i n g Bear was s u b s e q u e n t l y r e s t r a i n e d by o r d e r s of t h e s t a t e D i s t r i c t Court d a t e d A p r i l 11, 1979, May 7 , 1979, and October 4, 1979, from d i s p o s i n g of any p r o p e r t y belonging t o t h e e s t a t e of Douglas J. Standing Bear. On October 4 , 1979, t h e c o u r t removed her a s p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e f o r c a u s e . One of t h e d e c e d e n t ' s n a t u r a l c h i l d r e n , C o r r i n e B i l l y , was t h e r e a f t e r appointed p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e e s t a t e . On August 2 3 , 1978, Leota M . S t a n d i n g Bear p e t i t i o n e d t h e T r i b a l C o u r t o f t h e Chippewa-Cree T r i b e and was appointed a d m i n i s t r a t o r of d e c e d e n t ' s e s t a t e . Subsequent p r o c e e d i n g s were had i n t h a t c o u r t by Leota M . S t a n d i n g Bear, i n t h e e s t a t e of Douglas J. Standing Bear, and on June 1 8 , 1979, t h e T r i b a l Court g r a n t e d her ownership of c e r t a i n a s s e t s of decedent l o c a t e d a t t h a t t i m e on t h a t r e s e r v a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g t h e C a t e r p i l l a r motor g r a d e r . A l l of t h e s e proceedings and o r d e r s were made ex p a r t e w i t h o u t any n o t i c e t o any i n t e r e s t e d p e r s o n s , i n c l u d i n g any of d e c e d e n t ' s o t h e r h e i r s o r p o t e n t i a l h e i r s . On March 10, 1980, t h e T r i b a l Court made and e n t e r e d an o r d e r v a c a t i n g a l l p r i o r o r d e r s made i n t h e m a t t e r of t h e e s t a t e of Douglas Standing Bear f o r t h e reason t h a t t h e T r i b a l Court d i d n o t have j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e e s t a t e s i n c e decedent was n o t an e n r o l l e d member of t h e Chippewa-Cree T r i b e . A t t h e time of d e c e d e n t ' s d e a t h , t h e road g r a d e r was l o c a t e d on t h e F o r t Peck I n d i a n R e s e r v a t i o n . I t was moved t o t h e Rocky Boy's R e s e r v a t i o n . Defendant Leota S t a n d i n g Bear t h e n s o l d t h e g r a d e r t o her b r o t h e r , defendant Gerald B e l c o u r t , f o r $125, who i n t u r n s o l d it f o r $70,000 t o an unknown p a r t y . The D i s t r i c t Court found t h a t o u t of t h e p r o c e e d s , B e l c o u r t gave Leota S t a n d i n g Bear t h e sum of $22,000; k e p t $6,000 f o r h i m s e l f ; and d e p o s i t e d t h e sum of $42,000 i n t h e Montana Bank of Browning, Montana, i n h i s name and t h a t of h i s w i f e , J e a n B e l c o u r t . A l l d e f e n d a n t s i n t h i s a c t i o n a r e e n r o l l e d members of t h e Chippewa-Cree T r i b e . C o r r i n e B i l l y , a s p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e e s t a t e , brought a c l a i m and d e l i v e r y a c t i o n t o recover t h e g r a d e r or t h e proceeds of its s a l e . On March 26, 1980, t h e D i s t r i c t Court g r a n t e d p l a i n t i f f a p r e l i m i n a r y i n j u n c t i o n which r e s t r a i n e d t r a n s f e r of t h e g r a d e r or its proceeds. Defendants f i l e d a motion t o d i s m i s s t h e a c t i o n and a l s o a motion t o quash t h e p r e l i m i n a r y i n j u n c t i o n . The c o u r t continued t h e h e a r i n g on t h o s e motions t o May 28, 1980, combining t h e h e a r i n g w i t h t h e " p a r e n t " c a s e , P r o b a t e Cause No. 5158, E s t a t e of Douglas J. Standing Bear, Deceased. On J u l y 24, 1980, t h e D i s t r i c t Court h e l d t h a t it had j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e p r o b a t e proceeding b u t t h a t it lacked j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e c l a i m and d e l i v e r y a c t i o n . I n denying j u r i s d i c t i o n , t h e c o u r t noted t h a t t h e s a l e of t h e g r a d e r took p l a c e on t h e r e s e r v a t i o n , t h a t a s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t of t h e proceeds a r e d e p o s i t e d i n a bank on an I n d i a n r e s e r v a - t i o n , and t h a t t h e Chippewa-Cree T r i b a l Code c l a i m s j u r i s d i c t i o n of a l l c i v i l s u i t s whenever t h e d e f e n d a n t is a t r i b a l member. The D i s t r i c t Court concluded t h a t s t a t e j u r i s d i c t i o n would i n t e r f e r e w i t h t r i b a l government and t h a t p l a i n t i f f ' s remedy was t o s u e i n t h e T r i b a l Court. P l a i n t i f f a p p e a l s t h e f i n a l judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t Court. The s o l e i s s u e p r e s e n t e d t o t h i s Court on a p p e a l concerns t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e c l a i m and d e l i v e r y a c t i o n by t h e s t a t e D i s t r i c t Court. P l a i n t i f f contends t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court e r r e d when it held it d i d n o t have s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e c l a i m and d e l i v e r y a c t i o n a g a i n s t d e f e n d a n t s . I n Crawford e t a1. v. Roy ( 1 9 7 8 ) , 176 Mont. 227, 577 P.2d 392, t h i s Court, u s i n g t h e t r a n s a c t i o n a l a n a l y s i s t e s t , h e l d t h a t t h e r e were s u f f i c i e n t a c t i v i t i e s o c c u r r i n g o u t s i d e t h e r e s e r v a t i o n t o i n v e s t t h e s t a t e c o u r t w i t h j u r i s d i c t i o n and, a s s u c h , s t a t e j u r i s d i c t i o n could n o t be h e l d t o i n f r i n g e on t h e r i g h t s of t h e r e s e r v a t i o n I n d i a n s t o make t h e i r own laws and t o be r u l e d by t h e i r own laws. I n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , Leota S t a n d i n g Bear invoked s t a t e c o u r t j u r i s d i c t i o n when s h e p e t i t i o n e d f o r t h e p r o b a t e of her deceased husband's e s t a t e . A t t h e time of d e c e d e n t ' s d e a t h , t h e g r a d e r was n o t l o c a t e d on t h e Rocky Boy's Reser- v a t i o n ; and f u r t h e r , d e f e n d a n t s Gerald and J e a n B e l c o u r t a r e r e s i d e n t s of t h e S t a t e of Montana. These f a c t s , according t o a p p e l l a n t , a r e s u f f i c i e n t t o meet t h e t r a n s a c t i o n a l a n a l y s i s t e s t and, t h e r e f o r e , c o n f e r j u r i s d i c t i o n on t h e s t a t e c o u r t . There is no f e d e r a l t r e a t y o r s t a t u t e t h a t h a s preempted j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h e D i s t r i c t Court. Furthermore, t h e T r i b a l Court has n o t , and is n o t , e x e r c i s i n g j u r i s d i c - t i o n i n t h i s c a s e . T h e r e f o r e , t h e T r i b a l Court h a s n o t preempted D i s t r i c t Court j u r i s d i c t i o n b u t , i n f a c t , h a s conceded t h a t j u r i s d i c t i o n l i e s w i t h t h e s t a t e D i s t r i c t Court and w i l l s u p p o r t and e n f o r c e t h e s t a t e c o u r t ' s f i n a l o r d e r . A p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t , by e n t e r i n g i n t o a s a l e of t h e g r a d e r , r e s p o n d e n t s c o m m i t t e d t h e t o r t s o f f r a u d and c o n v e r s i o n a g a i n s t a p p e l l a n t . S i n c e such t o r t i o u s a c t s were d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t an e s t a t e being a d m i n i s t e r e d i n s t a t e c o u r t , and s i n c e such d e l i b e r a t e a c t i o n was taken t o d e p r i v e t h e s t a t e c o u r t of its l a w f u l j u r i s d i c t i o n , it would be p l a i n e r r o r t o hold t h a t remedial a c t i o n does n o t l i e i n s t a t e c o u r t . Respondents d i d n o t appear i n t h i s Court a t t h e time set f o r o r a l arguments. The b r i e f f i l e d by respondents i n d i c a t e s t h e f o l l o w i n g g e n e r a l p o s i t i o n . The s t a t e is precluded by f e d e r a l preemption and t h e e x e r c i s e of p l e n a r y power o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s o v e r I n d i a n t r i b e s f r o m e x e r c i s i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n i n I n d i a n e s t a t e and p r o b a t e m a t t e r s . E x c l u s i v e j u r i s d i c t i o n over e s t a t e and p r o b a t e proceedings r e s p e c t i n g d e s c e n t and d i s t r i b u t i o n of a s s e t s of an I n d i a n is v e s t e d i n t h e S e c r e t a r y of t h e I n t e r i o r by f e d e r a l law. See, 25 U.S .C. S372 e t s e q . ; 25 C.F.R. - 2 e t s e q . ; and 43 C.F.R. SS4.200 e t s e q . ; s e e a l s o Pub. L. No. 83-280, 67 STAT 588; 28 U.S.C. S 1 3 6 0 ( b ) ; and S t a t e ex r e l . Three I r o n s v. Three I r o n s ( 1 9 8 0 ) , Mon t . , 621 P.2d 476, 37 St.Rep. 2016. Respondents argue t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g r e s e r v a t i o n " c o n t a c t s " a r e s u f f i c i e n t t o d e f e a t s t a t e c o u r t j u r i s d i c t i o n : 1. The p r i n c i p a l h e i r s of Douglas J. Standing Bear r e s i d e d a t t h e t i m e of h i s d e a t h on t h e Rocky Roy's Reserva- t i o n ; 2. The p r i n c i p a l p l a c e of b u s i n e s s f o r t h e g r a d i n g s e r v i c e was on t h e Rocky Boy's R e s e r v a t i o n ; 3 . The c o n t r a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h e decedent under- took were w i t h t h e Bureau of I n d i a n A f f a i r s , t o be performed on I n d i a n r e s e r v a t i o n s ; 4 . The equipment and r e c o r d s of t h e b u s i n e s s were l o c a t e d on t h e F o r t Peck I n d i a n R e s e r v a t i o n ; 5. The income d e r i v e d from s e r v i c e s performed on I n d i a n r e s e r v a t i o n s ; 6 . An a d m i n i s t r a t i v e law p r o b a t e proceeding was ongoing under Daniel S. B O O S , A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Law Judge, and both a p p e l l a n t and respondents have n o t i c e t h e r e o f ; 7. Under 25 C.F.R. SS11.1 e t s e q . , through a Court of I n d i a n O f f e n s e s , any claimed h e i r may b r i n g s u i t t o determine h e i r s and d i v i d e d e c e d e n t ' s p r o p e r t y and t h a t d e c e d e n t ' s spouse, on August 23, 1978, sought and invoked j u r i s d i c t i o n t o t h a t e f f e c t ; and 8. More i m p o r t a n t l y , by o r d e r of March 10, 1980, j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e f i l e d p r o b a t e and e s t a t e p r o c e e d i n g s was, by t h e Court of 1ndia.n O f f e n s e s , attempted t o be conceded t o t h e s t a t e D i s t r i c t Court. The b r i e f s and D i s t r i c t Court f i l e h e r e i n a r e vague and d i f f i c u l t t o f o l l o w . I t a p p e a r s t h a t on August 9, 1978, Leota M . Standing Bear f i l e d an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r informal a p p o i n t m e n t o f p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e i n i n t e s t a c y o f d e c e d e n t ' s e s t a t e w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Twelfth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t . She was appointed p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a - t i v e t h a t same day. Two weeks l a t e r , Leota a p p l i e d t o t h e Rocky Boy's R e s e r v a t i o n t o have d e c e d e n t ' s e s t a t e adminis- t e r e d i n t h e T r i b a l C o u r t . On August 23, 1978, s h e was appointed a d m i n i s t r a t o r of t h e e s t a t e i n t h e T r i b a l Court. On October 4 , 1979, t h e D i s t r i c t Court removed Leota a s p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e and r e s t r a i n e d her from t r a n s - f e r r i n g o r d i s p o s i n g of t h e p r o p e r t y of t h e e s t a t e . Subse- q u e n t l y , on May 10, 1980, t h e T r i b a l Court e n t e r e d an o r d e r v a c a t i n g a l l p r i o r o r d e r s made i n t h e m a t t e r of t h e E s t a t e of Douglas J. Standing Bear f o r t h e reason t h a t it d i d n o t have j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e e s t a t e because decedent was n o t a member of t h e Chippewa-Cree T r i b e . The T r i b a l Court a l s o conceded j u r i s d i c t i o n t o t h e s t a t e . Leota was r e s t r a i n e d by o r d e r s of t h e D i s t r i c t Court d a t e d A p r i l 11, 1979, May 7, 1979, and October 4 , 1979, from d i s p o s i n g of any p r o p e r t y belonging t o t h e e s t a t e , i n c l u d i n g t h e g r a d e r which is t h e s u b j e c t of t h i s l i t i g a t i o n . However, a s s t a t e d p r e v i o u s l y , L e o t a , sometime a f t e r t h e October 4, 1979, o r d e r , s o l d t h e g r a d e r t o her b r o t h e r Gerald, who i n t u r n s o l d it t o a n o n r e s i d e n t . On March 1 4 , 1980, t h e p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , a p p e l l a n t h e r e i n , f i l e d an a c t i o n f o r c l a i m and d e l i v e r y of t h e g r a d e r . Respondents f i l e d a motion t o d i s m i s s f o r l a c k of s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n . A s i m i l a r motion was a l s o made i n t h e p r o b a t e proceeding. Both motions were t r i e d on May 28, 1980, i n s o f a r a s t h e y involved some of t h e same p a r t i e s and t h e same f a c t u a l m a t t e r s . On J u l y 24, 1980, t h e D i s t r i c t Court e n t e r e d anomalous r e s u l t s . The D i s t r i c t Court h e l d t h a t it had s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e p r o b a t e proceeding b u t t h a t it d i d n o t have s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s - d i c t i o n over t h e c l a i m and d e l i v e r y a c t i o n because such an e x e r c i s e would i n t e r f e r e w i t h r e s e r v a t i o n self-government. I n t h e l o n g s t a n d i n g c a s e of United S t a t e s ex r e l . Riggs v. Johnson County ( 1 8 6 8 ) , 6 Wall. 166, 18 L.Ed. 768, t h e United S t a t e s Supreme Court s t a t e d : " . . . J u r i s d i c t i o n is d e f i n e d t o be t h e power t o hear and determine t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r i n c o n t r o v e r s y i n t h e s u i t b e f o r e t h e c o u r t , and t h e r u l e is u n i v e r s a l , t h a t i f t h e power is c o n f e r r e d t o render t h e judgment o r e n t e r t h e d e c r e e , it a l s o i n c l u d e s t h e power t o i s s u e proper p r o c e s s t o e n f o r c e such judgment o r d e c r e e . . ." Furthermore, i n S t a t e ex r e l . Eisenhauer v. D i s t r i c t Court ( 1 9 1 7 ) , 54 Mont. 172, 168 P. 522, t h i s Court h e l d t h a t i f a c o u r t h a s t h e power t o make an o r d e r , it h a s j u r i s d i c - t i o n t o e n f o r c e t h a t o r d e r . The purpose of p r o b a t e is t h e j u s t and e q u i t a b l e t r a n s f e r of e s t a t e p r o p e r t y t o t h e proper h e i r s . The D i s - t r i c t Court determined t h a t it had j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e p a r e n t p r o b a t e proceeding. I n an a t t e m p t t o p r o t e c t t h e e s t a t e p r o p e r t y , t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s s u e d r e s t r a i n i n g o r d e r s a g a i n s t t h e d e c e d e n t ' s w i f e , Leota. Leota, however, a l l e g e d l y v i o l a t e d t h o s e o r d e r s and s o l d t h e g r a d e r , which was p a r t of t h e e s t a t e , t o her b r o t h e r . Contempt proceedings were i n i t i a t e d , b u t t h e D i s t r i c t Court f i l e is void of any d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e contempt m a t t e r . I n an a t t e m p t t o r e c o v e r t h e e s t a t e p r o p e r t y , a p p e l l a n t i n s t i t u t e d t h e p r e s e n t c l a i m and d e l i v e r y a c t i o n . The s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h i s a c t i o n has its r o o t s i n t h e p r o b a t e proceedings and, even though f i l e d s e p a r a t e l y , it is, none- t h e l e s s , t h e enforcement arm t o recover p r o p e r t y w i t h i n t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e p r o b a t e c o u r t , whose j u r i s d i c t i o n is n o t i n q u e s t i o n b u t conceded by t h e T r i b a l Court. A d d i t i o n a l l y , when Leota a p p l i e d t o t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t t o be t h e p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f d e c e d e n t ' s e s t a t e , s h e e l e c t e d t o be governed by t h e laws of Montana. She cannot r e t r e a t t o t h e r e s e r v a t i o n , d i s p o s e of p r o p e r t y c o n t r a r y t o s t a t e laws and be a f f o r d e d p r o t e c t i o n of t h e T r i b a l Court t o deny t h e s t a t e c o u r t of its j u r i s d i c t i o n t o e n f o r c e its r u l i n g s . Such an a c t i o n would make a sham of p r o b a t e proceedings. The a p p l i c a b l e r u l e s governing i m p o s i t i o n of j u r i s - d i c t i o n e n u n c i a t e d i n I r o n Bear v . D i s t r i c t Court ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 162 Mont. 335, 512 P.2d 1292 a r e : (1) whether t h e e x e r c i s e o f s t a t e j u r i s d i c t i o n would i n t e r f e r e w i t h r e s e r v a t i o n self-government; and ( 2 ) whether t h e t r i b a l c o u r t is cur- r e n t l y e x e r c i s i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n o r h a s e x e r c i s e d j u r i s d i c t i o n i n such a manner a s t o preempt s t a t e j u r i s d i c t i o n . T h i s h a s been a d e q u a t e l y addressed by Chief T r i b a l Judge M i t c h e l l i n h i s o r d e r d i s m i s s i n g t h i s m a t t e r and r e l i n q u i s h i n g s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n t o t h e s t a t e D i s t r i c t Court a s f o l l o w s : "This Court concedes t h a t j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y owned by Douglas J. Standing Bear o r i n which he had an i n t e r e s t , which may have been or is l o c a t e d on t h e Rocky Boy's R e s e r v a t i o n , is i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e Twelfth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t of t h e S t a t e of Montana, i n and f o r t h e Counfiy o f ------------ - H i l l . A l l of t h e m a t t e r s r e l a t i n g t o t h e p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y of Douglas J. S t a n d i n g Bear must be r e s o l v e d by t h e s a i d Court f o r t h e S t a t e of Montana, and t h e C o u r t o f I n d i a n ---------- O f f e n s e s w i l l s u p p o r t t h e f i n a l o r d e r s of t h e S t a t e Court and w i l l a s s i s t i n enforcement of o r d e r s of s a i d Court i f r e q u i r e d . " (Emphasis s u p p l i e d . ) The judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t Court is r e v e r s e d , and t h e cause remanded t o t h e s t a t e D i s t r i c t Court f o r f u r t h e r p r o c e e d i n g s . W e concur: ~ d - ( $ 7 P * M Chief J u s t i c e