Title: MATTER OF M L Y
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 82-077
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: December 16, 1982

I N THE SURPEME C O U R T O F THE STATE O F MONTANA I N T H E M A T T E R O F M. L. Y. AND M. Y. , Youth i n need o f c a r e . I N Rl2 T H E I.WRRIAGE O F MARVIN LEO YOTTER, P e t i t i o n e r and Respondent, THERESA NEIL YOTTEK PIILLIAMSON, Respondent and Appellant. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e T h i r t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e County of Yellowstone, The Honorable Diane G. Barz, Judge p r e s i d i n g . Counsel o f Record: For Appellant: Jones, Jones & Work; B l a i r Jones, E i l l i n g s , , For Respondent : Nye Law Firm; J e r r o l d L. Nye, B i l l i n g s , Montana Harold Eianser , County A t t o r n e y , B i l l i n g s , Montana Olsen, Christensen & Gannett; Damon L. Gannett, B i l l i n g s , Montana Submitted on B r i e f s : October 7, 1982 Cecided: December 16, 1982 F i l e d : !!KC 1 6 1982 M r . J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t . T h i s a p p e a l was taken from a judgment of the District Court o f t h e T h i r t e e n t h J u d i c i a l District d e c l a r i n g t h e c u s t o d y of M.L.Y. and M.Y. Due t o p r o c e d u r a l error we must v a c a t e t h e judgment of t h e District C o u r t . The u n d e r l y i n g c o n s o l i d a t e d a c t i o n s were t h e l a t e s t of a series of d i s p u t e s between t h e husband and wife s i n c e t h e i r d i v o r c e i n 1978. A t t h e t i m e of d i v o r c e t h e p a r t i e s e n t e r e d i n t o a c u s t o d y and s u p p o r t agreement. T h i s agreement was i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e d e c r e e of d i s s o l u t i o n . Theresa was to be t h e c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t of t h e two c h i l d r e n . Although t h e d e c r e e of d i s s o l u t i o n g r a n t e d r e a s o n a b l e v i s i t a t i o n , it a p p e a r s t h a t Theresa "continued t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h and b l o c k v i s i t a t i o n a t t e m p t s made by Marvin I n August 1979 , Marvin t r a v e l e d to South Dakota, t h e resi- dence of Theresa and t h e c h i l d r e n , and f i l e d a motion f o r change of custody. A h e a r i n g was h e l d and a v i s i t a t i o n agreement was e n t e r e d i n t o ; u n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e p a r t i e s continued to f i g h t o v e r v i s i t a t i o n r i g h t s . I n e a r l y 1980, Theresa moved to Arizona w i t h o u t in£ orming Marvin of h e r whereabouts. Marvin l a t e r l o c a t e d h i s ex-wife and c h i l d r e n and went to Arizona. On May 27, 1980, he e n t e r e d i n t o a n o t h e r v i s i t a t i o n agreement w i t h T h e r e s a ; he would t a k e t h e c h i l d r e n to Montana f o r t h e summer and would allow t h e c h i l d r e n t o r e t u r n to Arizona on o r a b o u t August 15. Marvin r e t u r n e d t o Montana w i t h t h e c h i l d r e n and f i l e d a motion f o r change of c u s t o d y i n District Court of Yellowstone County on J u l y 8 . An amended motion f o r change of c u s t o d y was f i l e d on August 5. On August 28, District Judge C h a r l e s Luedke d e n i e d M a r v i n ' s amended motion w i t h o u t h e a r i n g . Marvin d i s p u t e d Judge Luedke's o r d e r denying h i s motion and f i l e d a n o t i c e of a p p e a l on September 9 . However, on September 26, Marvin f i l e d a document e n t i t l e d "Withdrawal of Appeal. " During t h i s t i m e p e r i o d , Theresa came t o Montana t o r e g a i n c u s t o d y o f M.L.Y. and M.Y. Theresa was not a b l e t o f i n d t h e c h i l d r e n . Marvin, i n t e n d i n g t o f r u s t r a t e T h e r e s a ' s e f f o r t s to r e g a i n c u s t o d y , had s e n t t h e c h i l d r e n to Utah w i t h h i s p r e s e n t w i f e . Twice d u r i n g t h e month of September Marvin w a s a r r e s t e d f o r c u s t o d i a l i n t e r f e r e n c e . On September 30, t h e S t a t e became i n v o l v e d by f i l i n g a p e t i t i o n f o r temporary i n v e s t i g a t i v e a u t h o r i t y and p r o t e c t i v e s e r v i c e s . The District Court t h e n o r d e r e d t h e c h i l d r e n placed i n f o s t e r care pending f i n a l d i s p o s i - t i o n . On November 20 , Marvin was s u c c e s s f u l i n persuading t h e c o u r t t o o r d e r t h e c h i l d r e n removed from f o s t e r care and placed i n h i s c u s t o d y . On t h e same day, Marvin f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r change of c u s t o d y and a motion to c o n s o l i d a t e t h e dependency and n e g l e c t p r o c e e d i n g s w i t h h i s c u s t o d y a c t i o n . On t h a t day Judge Luedke o r d e r e d c o n s o l i d a t i o n . A l e n g t h y t r i a l ensued. A f i n a l o r d e r was e n t e r e d on November 9 , 1981. The Department of S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s was g r a n t e d l e g a l c u s t o d y of t h e c h i l d r e n u n t i l age e i g h t e e n , and Marvin was g r a n t e d g u a r d i a n s h i p and p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y u n t i l age e i g h t e e n . Theresa was g r a n t e d r e a s o n a b l e r i g h t s of v i s i t a t i o n . On December 8 , 1981, Theresa f i l e d a n o t i c e of a p p e a l . The a p p e l l a n t h a s r a i s e d s e v e r a l i s s u e s concerning v a r i o u s a c t i o n s of t h e District Court i n r e l a t i o n to j u r i s d i c t i o n and t h e c o n s o l i d a t i o n of t h e c u s t o d y a c t i o n and t h e dependency and n e g l e c t a c t i o n . F i r s t , a p p e l l a n t claims t h e D i s t r i c t Court d i d n o t have j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e c u s t o d y a c t i o n s i n c e t h e f a t h e r had f i l e d a n o t i c e of a p p e a l , t h u s t r a n s f e r r i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n to t h i s C o u r t . Second, n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n a l argument, a p p e l l a n t c o n t e n d s it was error to c o n s o l i d a t e t h e two c a u s e s because t o do s o was p r e j u d i c i a l ; " [ t l h e c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t should n o t be r e q u i r e d t o defend a g a i n s t t h e S t a t e of Montana and t h e n o n c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t s e e k i n g c u s t o d y i n one and t h e same a c t i o n ." W e need o n l y a d d r e s s t h e f i r s t i s s u e . A p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t s i n c e a n o t i c e of appeal was f i l e d by h e r husband from d i s m i s s a l of h i s amended motion f o r change of c u s t o d y , t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e p a r t i e s and t h e s u b j e c t matter had passed to t h i s C o u r t , l e a v i n g t h e District Court w i t h o u t a u t h o r i t y to a s s e r t j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e subsequent p e t i t i o n f o r change of custody. A t t h i s time we must restate t h e chronology o f v a r i o u s documents: 1. On August 28, 1980, t h e District Court denied t h e f a t h e r ' s amended motion f o r change of custody. 2. On September 9 , 1980, t h e f a t h e r f i l e d a n o t i c e of a p p e a l . 3 . On September 26, 1980, t h e f a t h e r f i l e d w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t a document e n t i t l e d ''Withdrawal of Appeal." 4 . On November 20, 1980, t h e f a t h e r f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r change of c u s t o d y and a motion to c o n s o l i d a t e h i s p e t i t i o n w i t h t h e dependency and n e g l e c t a c t i o n f i l e d by t h e Yellowstone County A t t o r n e y ' s O f f i c e . On t h e same day t h e D i s t r i c t Court o r d e r e d c o n s o l i d a t i o n . I n i t i a l l y , w e n o t e t h a t t h e husband's n o t i c e of a p p e a l w a s t i m e l y ; it was f i l e d w i t h i n t h i r t y days of t h e District C o u r t ' s d e n i a l o f t h e motion f o r change of c u s t o d y . See Rule 5 , M.R.App.Civ.P. Such a t i m e l y f i l i n g v e s t s t h i s Court w i t h j u r i s - d i c t i o n . I n J u l i a n v. Buckley ( 1 9 8 1 ) , - -- Mont . _ , 625 P.2d 526, 528, 38 St.Rep. 1 2 8 , 130, we s t a t e d : " [ s j i n c e 1954 it h a s been an e s t a b l i s h e d r u l e i n Montana t h a t when a n o t i c e of a p p e a l h a s been f i l e d , j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e c o n t r o v e r s y and s u b j e c t matter p a s s e s from t h e District Court and v e s t s i n t h e Supreme Court." I t is argued t h a t t h e a p p e a l was never p e r f e c t e d because t h e f e e was n o t p a i d n o r w a s t h e record t r a n s f e r r e d , and as a con- s e q u e n c e , j u r i s d i c t i o n w a s n e v e r a c q u i r e d by t h i s C o u r t . However, t h e proponents of t h i s argument o v e r l o o k a s t a t e m e n t i n t h e comments t o Rule 4 , M.R.App.Civ.P.: " [n] o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n t h e f i l i n g o f a n o t i c e of a p p e a l i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t is r e q u i r e d f o r t h e p e r f e c t i n g of an a p p e a l . " Annotations to M C A , 540 V o l . 3 , T i t l e 25, p. 543. On September 9 , 1980, t h e d a t e t h e n o t i c e of a p p e a l was f i l e d w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t Court, t h i s C o u r t ' s j u r i s d i c t i o n w a s invoked. On September 26, 1980, t h e f a t h e r f i l e d a document w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t Court i n d i c a t i n g h i s i n t e n t i o n s to withdraw h i s a p p e a l . The document s i m p l y s a i d " N O W COMES t h e P e t i t i o n e r and withdraws h i s a p p e a l h e r e i n . DATED t h i s 2 6 t h day of September, 1980." Rule 36, M.R.App.Civ.P. states t h a t " [ i ] f an appeal h a s n o t been docketed t h e a p p e a l may be dismissed by t h e c o u r t from which t h e a p p e a l was taken . . . upon motion and n o t i c e by t h e a p p e l l a n t . " Nothing i n t h e record i n d i c a t e s e i t h e r motion or n o t i c e . W e must conclude t h a t t h e f a t h e r ' s document e n t i t l e d "Withdrawal of Appeal" was n o t s u f f i c i e n t to d i v e s t t h i s Court of its j u r i s d i c - t i o n . "Whether or n o t t h e a p p e l l a n t . . . w i l l be p e r m i t t e d to d i s m i s s o r withdraw h i s a p p e a l . . . is a matter w i t h i n t h e d i s c r e t i o n of t h e c o u r t , and n o t a matter of r i g h t on t h e p a r t of t h e a p p e l l a n t . . ." 5 Arn.Jur.2d - Appeal - . and - -- E r r o r - S e c t i o n 920 ( 1 9 6 2 ) . The r u l e s of a p p e l l a t e c i v i l p r o c e d u r e must be f o l l o w e d , h e r e t h e y were n o t . Consequently, when t h e f a t h e r f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r change of c u s t o d y on November 20, 1980, t h e District Court was w i t h o u t j u r i s d i c t i o n and it was error to e n t e r an o r d e r of c o n s o l i d a t i o n . Montana l a w is c l e a r , once a n o t i c e of a p p e a l is f i l e d , j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r v e s t s i n t h e Supreme Court and it "becomes t h e Supreme C o u r t ' s d u t y to m a i n t a i n t h e s t a t u s q u o of t h e p a r t i e s u n t i l t h e c o n t r o v e r s y c a n be determined ." J u l i a n , - - - - .- - Mont. a t - , 625 P.2d a t 528, 38 St.Rep. a t 130. W e v a c a t e t h e o r d e r s of t h e D i s t r i c t Court dated August 24, 1981, and November 9 , 1981. I n t h e i n t e r e s t s of minimizing harm t o t h e c h i l d r e n , w e r e i n s t a t e t h e o r d e r of t h e c o u r t d a t e d November 20, 1980, p l a c i n g t h e c h i l d r e n i n temporary c u s t o d y of t h e n a t u r a l f a t h e r . I f t h e state o r i f t h e f a t h e r choose to r e i n s t i t u t e p r o c e e d i n g s , t h e y may do s o w i t h i n t h i r t y days from t h e d a t e t h i s d e c i s i o n is handed down, w i t h o u t p r e j u d i c e . However, i f no p r o c e e d i n g s a r e i n i t i a t e d , t h e District Court must uphold t h e m o t h e r ' s c u s t o d y r i g h t s by o r d e r i n g t h e c h i l d r e n r e t u r n e d t o h e r care. 4 ustice ':Je concur: