# ORIGINAL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22-0031

IN THE MATTER OF THE CONTEMPT ORDER REGARDING: LYNDA SCHMEIDBAUER 

# 1-ILLJ MAY 2 4 2022
Bovvn Greenwood Clerk of Suprerne Court Rtate of Montana ORDER

On January 20, 2022, Lynda Schmeidbauer, via counsel, filed a Notice ofAppeal in thisCourt and servedthisNotice on the SandersCountyClerkofCourt,the SandersCounty Attorney, and a court reporter. The Notice further indicated that Schmeidbauer was appealing from a January 5, 2022 judgment entered in Cause No. DV-22-05 in the Twentieth Judicial District Court, Sanders County, Hon. James A. Manley presiding. On March 16, 2022, Schmeidbauer filed her Opening Brief, which she served only upon the Sanders County Attorney. In the brief, Schmeidbauer argued that the District Court erred in issuing an Order ofContempt against her on November 10, 2021, without following the proper procedure or making a proper record. No parties filed a response and her case was then submitted to this Court for disposition. We have reviewed this matter and determined it is not properly before this Court on appeal. From the record and Schmeidbauer's brief, it appears that Schmeidbauer was summoned as a potential juror under the District Court's Cause No. DC-21-07. On November 10, 2021, Judge Manley issued an Order ofContempt, finding Schmeidbauer in contempt for refusingto comply with the court'sdirections and fining Schmeidbauer $500, to be paid by November 30, 2021. Schmeidbauer did not pay and on January 5, 2022, Judge Manley issued a Judgment on Contempt, under its Cause No. DV-22-05, entering judgment against Schmeidbauer in the amount of$500. 05/24/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0031The exclusive method of review of a contempt order, apart from exceptions not

applicable here, is by application for writ of certiorari (also known as a writ ofreview). Section 3-1-523,MCA;AnimalFound. ofGreatFallsv. Mont. EighthJudicialDist. Court, 2011 MT 289, ¶ 16, 362 Mont. 485, 265 P.3d 659. Under Article WI, Section 2(1), ofthe Montana Constitution, and pursuant to M. R. App. P. 14, this Court is empowered to hear and determine such writs. In this case, Schmeidbauer did not petition for writ but instead filed a direct appeal to challenge a contempt order. We cannot consider Schmeidbauer's challenge of the November 10, 2021 Order ofContempt on direct appeal, nor would deeming her filing to be a petition forwrit ofcertiorari be sufficient to cure the deficiency. First, M. R. App. P. 14(6) requires that a petition for writ must be served upon the district judge against whose ruling it is directed and upon all parties. In this matter, Schmeidbauer failed to serve Judge Manley. Second, even ifwe were to either deem Schmeidbauer's appeal to be a petition for writ ofcertiorari, or to give Schmeidbauer leave to refile this matter as a petition for writ, and direct Schmeidbauer to serve the correct parties, there is no relief available to her as the time to file suchpetition expiredwell before Schmeidbauer filedherNotice ofAppeal. A writ ofreview must be filed within 30 days ofthe date the district court enters its order finding contempt. Jonesv. Mont. NineteenthJud. Dist. Ct,2001MT276,¶22, 307Mont. 305, 37 P.3d 682. InJones, weheldthat, pursuant toM. R.App. P. 5 (now renumbered as M. R. App. P. 4(5)(a)(i)), petitions for writs ofcertiorari to review contempt proceedings mustbe filed with the clerk ofthe district courtwithin 30 days ofthe date the district court enters its order finding contempt. Here, Judge Manley issued his Order of Contempt on November 10, 2021. Schmeidbauer had 30 days from that date—until December 10, 2021—to file her petition forwrit ofcertiorari in this Court. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

2The Clerk is directed to provide copies ofthis Order to counsel for Schmeidbauer,

the Sanders County Attorney, the Sanders County Clerk of Court, and Hon. James A. Manley, presiding District Judge. DATED this zLiday ofMay, 2022.

Justices

3