Title: STATE EX REL CHEBUL v DISTRICT CO
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 13054
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: August 11, 1975

No. 13054 I N THE SUPRh'ME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA THE STATE OF MONTANA ex re1 WILLIAM G. CHEBUL, R e l a tor, THE DISTKlCT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA, I N AND FOR THE COUNTY OF 'CREASURE AND THE HONORABLE ROBERT H. WILSON, DISTRlCT JUDGE, R e s p o n d e n t s . ORIGINAL PROCEEDING: C o u n s e l of R e c o r d : For R e l a t o r : R a l p h H e r r i o t t argued, Hysham, M o n t a n a F o r R e s p o n d e n t s : M i c h a e l J. W h a l e n argued, B i l l i n g s , Montana - S u b m i t t e d : June 9, 1 9 7 5 D e c i d e d : AU l i 1 f. 9975 F i l e d : ~ L J L A A 1 3ib M r . J u s t i c e John Conway Harrison delivered the Opinion of t h e Court. This i s an o r i g i n a l proceeding wherein William G. Chebul seeks a stay order r e l a t i n g t o d i s t r i b u t i o n and payment of c e r t a i n r o y a l t i e s t o Marjorie Chebul, pending f i n a l judgment i n a divorce action. O n June 18, 1969, the d i s t r i c t court of Yellowstone County, Hon. Charles Sande, presiding, made and entered a decree of separate maintenance f o r the support of Marjorie Chebul and her daughters. The cause was e n t i t l e d "Majorie Chebul v. William G. Chebul", Civil Action No. 53053, i n Yellowstone County. The decree provided i n part: "In l i e u of a l l future obligation of the defendant t o support t h e p l a i n t i f f , there i s hereby s e t over t o her a s her separate property f o r her support and t o a s s i s t i n the support and education of the children of the p a r t i e s , the property following * * *.I1 Then the decree l i s t e d numerous o i l and gas leases owned by William G. Chebul, together with i n t e r e s t s i n other property s e t f o r t h and described i n p a r t i c u l a r i t y . The decree was entered by default. N o appeal was taken. Some f i v e and a half years l a t e r , on December 16, 1974, William G. Chebul f i l e d a complaint f o r a divorce against h i s wife Marjorie i n Cause No. 1154, Treasure County, Montana, Hon. Robert Wilson, presiding judge. In t h a t action p l a i n t i f f con- tends the assignment of t h e o i l and gas leases executed a s a d i r e c t r e s u l t of the above quoted portion of the decree of separate maintenance, should be declared invalid and the property of William G. Chebul, and t h a t a l l such o i l and gas leases be f r e e from a l l l i e n , charge o r encumbrance f o r the purpose of child support. As a r e s u l t of the f i l i n g of the complaint f o r a divorce by William Chebul, a l l support income t o Marjorie and her two daughters was stopped i n January 1975. Marjorie alleges t h a t it has been necessary f o r her t o borrow money t o keep her daugh- t e r s i n school a s w e l l a s t o support h e r s e l f . She i s now within one year of obtaining a degree i n nursing. William Chebul, through t h e f i l i n g of t h e action i n t h i s Court i s attempting ro keep t h e funds involved impounded u n t i l t h e r e can be a f i n a l judgment i n the divorce action. Najorie f i l e d an answer t o t h e divorce complaint and l a t e r f i l e d an amended answer and cross-complaint s e t t i n g f o r t h estoppel aid laches a s t o the r u l i n g t h a t t h e decree of separate maintenance was mooted. Hearing on the motion t o amend was heard i n Treasure Sounty on May 23, 1975 by Judge Wilson who took t h e testimony . ~ r ' Marjorie over t h e p r o t e s t s of counsel f o r William, who was n o t present. The t r i a l court noted a t t h e end of ~ a r j o r i e ' s .iirect and cross-examination: "Mr. Whalen, a t t h i s point t h e Court i s going t o take the position t h a t t h i s matter comes on before che Court a t t h i s t i m e not on the merits of whether d r n o t t h e support i s needed o r required, but s t r i c t l y Jn t h e l e g a l question of whether o r not t h e previous ~ r d e r of the Court here i n Yellowstone County w a s v a l i d ~r i n v a l i d . I don't need any more evidence a t t h i s ~ o i n t , and I w i l l accept no f u r t h e r evidence a t t h i s uoint: I am going t o deny t h e motion t o s t a y , however, T w i l l allow Counsel f o r William Chebul u n t i l the 13th df June t o obtain a W r i t protecting ~ i l l i a m ' s r i g h t s in t h a t respect t h a t t h e previous order of t h e Court was invalid, but on t h e 13th day of June i f t h i s Court has not been r e s t r a i n e d by the higher Court t h e r e w i l l be an order entered, ordering t h e o i l companies t o continue payment of a l l p a s t and held and immediate proceeds of she r o y a l t i e s . I I !-t should be noted t h a t a d d i t i o n a l l y t h e home was s e t over so rvlarjorie and has since been sold. Marjorie has received a ;urn or' over $50,000; and, u n t i l t h e divorce action was s t a r t e d , was receiving some $1500 per month. P l a i n t i f f William, i n the divorce a c t i o n , seeks a s t a y of these payments pending t h e appeal. ilefendant Marjorie has appealed from Judge ~ i l s o n ' s order of vlay 1, 1975, which order recognized t h a t t h e property t i t l e l a d not been transferred. It appears t h a t Marjorie may be e n t i t l e d t o some support payments pending the hearing on the divorce, but from t h i s record we cannot know. However it equally appears that the royalty payments would be dissipated and l o s t should William prevail. It seems then, i n j u s t i c e , t h a t the royalty payments should be stayed pending a t r i a l on t h e merits. Accordingly, t h i s Court d i r e c t s t h a t the order of May 23, 1975 be s e t aside, t h a t the d i s t r i c t court further consider a reasonable support for Marjorie and the daughters i f so indicated and t h a t t h e balance of the royalty payments be impounded pending hearing on the merits. It i s so ordered.