Opinion ID: 883751
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 22

Heading: cross appeal issue v attorney's fees

Text: Michelle's final argument is that she should have been awarded attorney's fees. Section 40-4-110, MCA, governs awards of attorney's fees and provides: The court from time to time, after considering the financial resources of both parties, may order a party to pay a reasonable amount for the cost to the other party of maintaining or defending any proceeding under chapters 1 and 4 of this title and for attorney's fees... . The District Court may award attorney's fees after considering the financial resources of both parties and such an award is largely discretionary with the District Court.... In re Marriage of Roullier (1987), 229 Mont. 348, 360, 746 P.2d 1081, 1088. This is not a case such as Roullier where one party is clearly in a better financial position and can properly be ordered to pay attorney's fees. In the instant case, in view of both parties' well-documented negligible financial resources and Daniel's overall health and employability problems, neither party is in a position to pay the other party's attorney's fees and the District Court properly considered this issue. We hold that the District Court did not err in ordering each party to pay their own attorney's fees. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART. TURNAGE, C.J., and HUNT, GRAY and WEBER, JJ., concur.