~.~L➢AA 1
.. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 23-0747
IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF: SHAWN M. STUZMAN,

Petitioner and Appellee, and KRIS STUTZMAN,

Respondent and Appellant. ORDER



### JAN 0 9 2024 Bowen Greenwood art t .,—.4 c.. Self-represented Kris Stutzman (Kris) has filed an "Emergency Notice ofAppeal, Request for Stay Order, and Injunction" in her recently filed appeal. She also filed an amended document with the same title. Kris explains that she seeks relief from the Twentieth Judicial District Court, Lake County, December 7, 2023 Order in a dissolution matter. She includes copies ofseveraljudgments as well as the case register ofactions. We reviewed the attachments. Through counsel, Shawn M. Stutzman (Shawn) petitioned the District Court for a dissolution of marriage in April 2022. Kris filed a response to the Petition. On October 27, 2022, the court dismissed a temporary order of protection sought by Shawn and vacated the hearing. In November, Kris's counsel filed a notice ofappearance. As ofMarch 1, 2023, Shawn moved to compel the sale ofreal property. Kris filed a response on March 20, 2023, and her counsel moved to withdraw representation nine days later. The court continuedthe deadlines intheproceeding, and Krishad othercounsel in late April 2023. On May 5, 2023, the Marital and Property Settlement Agreement as well as a Stipulated Parenting Plan were filed. The parties also filed a Joint Affidavit for Entry ofDecree ofDissolution ofMarriage on that day. The court entered its findings and conclusionson May 11, 2023, andthe notice ofentry ofdecree was filed on May 15, 2023. 01/09/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0747In July 2023, Shawn sought awarrant for contempt and statement ofcharge. Shawn

was seeking to sell the real property. Kris responded in August and later sought additional time. On August 24, 2023, the court granted her extension and ordered an abeyance. The court ordered that the "deadline to refinance or assume the mortgage encurnbering the real property awarded to her pursuant to the parties' May 1, 2023 Martial and Property SettlementAgreement [was] extended by sixty (60) days from the date ofthis Order." The courtheld Shawn'sWarrant for Conternpt andAttorney Fees in abeyance. OnDecember 7, 2023, the Lake County District Court denied Kris's second rnotion of extension of time and granted Shawn's emergency motion regarding the sale of the rnarital home and confirming interest onjudgment. Kris contends that a stay ofthejudgment or an injunction is appropriate "to prevent irreparableharrn[.]" Sheprovides thather appeal is urgent and that her fairtrial rights have been violated. She asserts that the property, the marital home, was prematurely listed and has an inaccurate valuation. She requests an injunction "to maintain a stable and secure environment for [her] children, aligning with the best interests and the principles of Montana law." Under the Montana Rules ofAppellate Procedure, a person first rnust seek a stay in District Court. M. R. App. P. 22(1)(a)(i). The rule provides that "rnotions under this rule which have not been filed in accordance with sections (1) and (2)(a) ofthis rule
. . .will be denied summarily." M. R. App. P. 22(4). Kris has not indicated that she sought a stay in the District Court prior to seeking reliefhere. We secured an updated copy ofthe register of actions and another order the court entered after its December 7 order. On December 19, 2023, Shawn filed an Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Injunction, Motion for Writ of Assistance, Second Motion for Warrant of Contempt, Statement of Charge, and Motion for Attorney Fees. On December 21, 2023, the District Court issued an Order excluding Kris from the family home and setting a hearing for January 4, 2024, for Kris to answer the contempt charge. Kris did not file a motion for stay in the District Court prior to seeking such reliefhere.

2Turning to Kris's request for an injunction, M. R. App. P. 14(2) allows the Court to

entertain apetition forwritofinjunctionasan originalproceeding,butthisisnotanoriginal proceeding. Kris has sought a direct appeal ofthe District Court's rulingallowing the sale ofthe marital home. As such, Kris's motion for an injunction is in effect a motion to stay execution ofthe District Court'sjudgment pending appeal. As explained above, a motion for stay may be summarily dismissed when it does not comport with this Court's rules. M. R. App. P. 22(4). Kris did not seek a stay in District Court, and thus, she has not complied with the requirements ofM. R. App. P. 22 governing a request for stay. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Kris's Motion for Stay or Injunctive Reliefis DENIED. The Clerk is directedtoprovide a copy ofthis Orderto counsel ofrecord and to Kris Stutzman alongwith a copy ofthis Court's Civil Appellate Handbook.

A —, DATED this 1 "-- day ofJanuary, 2024.

ChiefJustice



# l erz-2--(?-/-4.--L- /

L ie ria

ll is9: 1"

,.._, /? Ct

i , Justices

3