TN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

RICHARD C. LUSSY, Plaintiff and Appellant,
vs

# . J. MICHAEL YOUNG, Defendant andRespondent. 

### JAN

## 241985

OPINION, ORDER AND JUDGMENT

Richard C. Lussy a.ppea1.s from an order cf theDistrict Court, Third Judicial District, Deer Lodge County, the Hon. Henry Loble presiding, from an order dismissing Lussy

## 's complaint againstJ. Michael Young. The only issue on appeal is the propriety of the District Court's dismissal of Lussy's compl-aj-nt aga.inst J. Michael Young. In cause no. DV-84-72 in the same District Court, Richard C. Lussy sued John Conway Harrison, John C. Sheehy, Fred J. Weber and L. C. Gulhrandson as individuals, without reference totheir judicial positions, in a complaint filed in Deer Lodge County. J. Michael Young, a state employee, appeared as attorney for the named indivj-dual defendants in that action and brought about an order of theDistrictCourt todismiss theaction against the said individuals. Lussy then sued J. Michael Young intheDistrictCourt, DeerLodge County incause no. DT7-84-93, on thegrounds that Young had represented the individuals in the action, thatthis was improper and that he was guilty 

### of conspiracy, improper official actions, and abuse of the principle of "justinhoard." In the District Court, Judge Loble dismissed the complaint.against Young, saying i.n his order of August 22,
"The gist of plaintiff's rambling,uncomprehensible complaint seems to be that the defendant represented private, non-governmental clients in his capacity as an empl-oyeeof state government. However, plaintiff attached to his complaint a motion to dismiss and memorandum in support of motion to dismiss in Cause No. DV 84 72 in the DistrictCourt ofDeerLodgeCounty, &d?i!@aefendants of that action were four Montana State Supreme Court Justices. The defendant in this case acted as lawyer for the defendant justices in the earlier action. Mr. Young clearly defended the action against the justices on the basis that they were being sued for an act in discharge of a duty associated with judicial actions of the Court. An allegation that Young represented the justices as private individuals when the attached exhibits showed he represented them in their judicial capacities sets forthno causeof action." Although four justices on this Court are indirectly involved in this action in that the attorney, J. Michael Young, had represented them, and is now being sued for that representation,

### we seeno confl-ictof interest in recognizing in Lussy's present compIa.i.nt and appeal a fruitless, weightless, needless, senseless action. The a.ppea1,as was the action in the District Court, is frivol-ousand as such

This cause isanotherof a series of proceedings brought by Lussy in both state and federal courts in which he has imputed i-ncompetence,bias and conspiracy against judges and parties involved in his actions, and he has subjected the judicia.1process to denigration.IT ISTHEREFOREORDERED: 1. The appeal of Richard C. Lussy from the judgment of dismissal of cause no. DV-84-93, in theDistrictCourt,Deer LodgeCounty,be and the same isherebydismissed. 2. Richard C. Lussy is assessed costs in the sum of $250.00 payable to the Clerk of thisCourt for deposit in the State Treasury of the State of Fontana as past reimbursement to the State for the unnecessary expense and time he has taken of stateofficials. 3. The Cl-erk of this Court is directed to mail a certified copy of this Order to the Clerk of the District Court in and for the Third LTudicial District, Deer Jtodge County. Such copy of this order and judgment shall be and serve the office of a judgment for costs against Richard C. Lussy znd entitled to all of the lien protection of a judgment. Such judgment shall be docketed i.n the District Court under the cause file number from which the appeal
arose. 4. Copy to of record,and to Richard C. Lussy. DATED this

r Chief JusticeJustices