No. 13054 

IN THE SUPRh'ME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

THE STATE OF MONTANA ex re1 

WILLIAM G. CHEBUL, 

Rela tor, 

THE DISTKlCT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH 

JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF 

MONTANA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF 

'CREASURE AND THE HONORABLE ROBERT H. 

WILSON, DISTRlCT JUDGE, 

Respondents. 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING: 

Counsel of Record : 

For Relator : 

Ralph Herriott argued, Hysham, Montana 

For Respondents: 

Michael J. Whalen argued, Billings, Montana 

- 

Submitted: June 9, 1975 

Decided : AU li 1 f. 9975 

Filed : ~LJLA A 1 3ib 
Mr. Justice John Conway Harrison delivered the Opinion of the 

Court. 

This is an original proceeding wherein William G. 

Chebul seeks a stay order relating to distribution and payment 

of certain royalties to Marjorie Chebul, pending final judgment 

in a divorce action. 

On June 18, 1969, the district court of Yellowstone 

County, Hon. Charles Sande, presiding, made and entered a 

decree of separate maintenance for the support of Marjorie 

Chebul and her daughters. The cause was entitled "Majorie 

Chebul v. William G. Chebul", Civil Action No. 53053, in 

Yellowstone County. The decree provided in part: 

"In lieu of all future obligation of the defendant 

to support the plaintiff, there is hereby set over 

to her as her separate property for her support and 

to assist in the support and education of the children 

of the parties, the property following * * *.I1 

Then the decree listed numerous oil and gas leases owned by 

William G. Chebul, together with interests in other property 

set forth and described in particularity. The decree was 

entered by default. No appeal was taken. 

Some five and a half years later, on December 16, 1974, 

William G. Chebul filed a complaint for a divorce against his 

wife Marjorie in Cause No. 1154, Treasure County, Montana, Hon. 

Robert Wilson, presiding judge. In that action plaintiff contends the assignment of the oil and gas leases executed as a 

direct result of the above quoted portion of the decree of separate 

maintenance, should be declared invalid and the property of 

William G. Chebul, and that all such oil and gas leases be free 

from all lien, charge or encumbrance for the purpose of child 

support. 

As a result of the filing of the complaint for a divorce 

by William Chebul, all support income to Marjorie and her two 

daughters was stopped in January 1975. Marjorie alleges that 
it has been necessary for her to borrow money to keep her daughters in school as well as to support herself. She is now within 

one year of obtaining a degree in nursing. William Chebul, 

through the filing of the action in this Court is attempting 

ro keep the funds involved impounded until there can be a final 

judgment in the divorce action. 

Najorie filed an answer to the divorce complaint and later 

filed an amended answer and cross-complaint setting forth estoppel 

aid laches as to the ruling that the decree of separate maintenance 

was mooted. Hearing on the motion to amend was heard in Treasure 

Sounty on May 23, 1975 by Judge Wilson who took the testimony 

.~r' Marjorie over the protests of counsel for William, who was 

not present. The trial court noted at the end of ~arjorie's 

.iirect and cross-examination: 

"Mr. Whalen, at this point the Court is going to 

take the position that this matter comes on before 

che Court at this time not on the merits of whether 

dr not the support is needed or required, but strictly 

Jn the legal question of whether or not the previous 

~rder of the Court here in Yellowstone County was valid 

~r invalid. I don't need any more evidence at this 

~oint, and I will accept no further evidence at this 

uoint: I am going to deny the motion to stay, however, 

T will allow Counsel for William Chebul until the 13th 

df June to obtain a Writ protecting ~illiam's rights 

in that respect that the previous order of the Court was 

invalid, but on the 13th day of June if this Court has 

not been restrained by the higher Court there will be 

an order entered, ordering the oil companies to continue 

payment of all past and held and immediate proceeds of 

she royalties. I I 

!-t should be noted that additionally the home was set over 

so rvlarjorie and has since been sold. Marjorie has received a 

;urn or' over $50,000; and, until the divorce action was started, 

was receiving some $1500 per month. Plaintiff William, in the 

divorce action, seeks a stay of these payments pending the appeal. 

ilefendant Marjorie has appealed from Judge ~ilson's order of 

vlay 1, 1975, which order recognized that the property title 

lad not been transferred. 
It appears that Marjorie may be entitled to some support 

payments pending the hearing on the divorce, but from this record 

we cannot know. However it equally appears that the royalty 

payments would be dissipated and lost should William prevail. 

It seems then, in justice, that the royalty payments should be 

stayed pending a trial on the merits. 

Accordingly, this Court directs that the order of May 23, 

1975 be set aside, that the district court further consider a 

reasonable support for Marjorie and the daughters if so indicated 

and that the balance of the royalty payments be impounded pending 

hearing on the merits. It is so ordered.