No. 

### 13054 INTHE 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, INAND FOR 

### THE COUNTY OF 'CREASURE AND THE HONORABLE ROBERT H. WILSON, DISTRlCT 

### JUDGE, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING: Counsel

### of Record

### : For Relator

### : RalphHerriott argued, Hysham, Montana ForRespondents: Michael J. Whalen 

### argued, Billings, 

### Montana

- Submitted: 

### June 9, 1975 Decided

### : 

### AU

### li1 

## f.9975 Filed: ~LJLA A 

### 1 3ib

### Mr. 

### Justice John Conway Harrison delivered the Opinion of the Court.
This isan original proceeding wherein William G. 

### Chebul seeks a stay order relating to distribution and payment of certain royalties toMarjorie Chebul, pending finaljudgment in a divorce action. On June 18, 1969, the district court of Yellowstone County, Hon. Charles Sande, presiding, made and entered a decree of separatemaintenance for the support of Marjorie Chebul and her daughters. The causewas entitled "Majorie Chebul v. William G. 

### Chebul", Civil Action No. 53053, in Yellowstone County. The decree provided in part: "In lieu of allfuture obligation of the defendant to support the plaintiff, there ishereby set over toher as her separateproperty forher support and toassist in the support and education of the children of the parties, the property following

# ** *.I1 

### Then the decree listednumerous oiland gas leases owned by William G. 

### Chebul, together with interests in other property set forthand described inparticularity. The decreewas entered by default. No appeal was taken. Some fiveand 

### 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 oiland 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 oiland gas leases be free from alllien, charge or encumbrance for the purpose of child support. As a result of the filing of the complaint for a divorce by William Chebul, allsupport income toMarjorie and her two daughters was stopped inJanuary 1975. Marjorie alleges thatit has been necessary for her toborrow money tokeep her daughters in school aswellas to support herself. She 

### isnow within
one year of obtaining a degree innursing. 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 separatemaintenance
was mooted. Hearing on the motion to amend was heard inTreasure Sounty on May 

### 23, 1975 by Judge Wilson who took the testimony 

### .~r' Marjorie over the protests of counsel forWilliam, who was not present. The trialcourt noted atthe 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 atthis timenot on the merits of whether drnot the support 

### isneeded orrequired, but strictly Jn the legal question of whether or not the previous ~rder of the Court here inYellowstone County 

### was valid 

### ~rinvalid. I don't need any more evidence atthis ~oint, and 

### I 

### willaccept no further evidence atthis uoint: 

### I am going to deny the motion to stay, however, 

### T willallow Counsel forWilliam Chebul until the 13th df June to obtain a Writprotecting ~illiam's rights in that respect that the previous order of the Court 

### was invalid, but on the 13thday of June if this Court has not been restrained by the higher Court there

### willbe an order entered, ordering the oilcompanies tocontinue payment of allpast and held and immediate proceeds of she royalties. II !-t should be noted that additionally the home was set over
so rvlarjorie and has sincebeen 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, injustice, that the royalty payments should be stayed pending a trialon themerits. 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 thebalance of the royalty payments be impounded pending hearing on the merits. It 

### is so ordered.