Opinion ID: 889413
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: issues

Text: ¶ 38 Whether the District Court erred in including in LaMoine's share of the marital estate the value of the tribal trust land that she leases. ¶ 39 In its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order, the District Court stated that although the land is tribal trust land, it does have value that must be accounted for in this action of $10,000. LaMoine argues that the District Court erred in making this determination because the tribal trust land does not belong to either party, it belongs to the Tribes. We agree. ¶ 40 Section 40-4-202, MCA, provides that in a proceeding for dissolution of a marriage, the court may equitably apportion between the parties the property and assets belonging to either or both, however and whenever acquired and whether the title thereto is in the name of the husband or wife or both [emphasis added]. In this case, LaMoine does not have title to the tribal trust land. Rather, she is entitled to lease it because she is an enrolled member of the Tribes. Because Michael is not an enrolled member of the Tribes, he cannot benefit from the tribal lease. ¶ 41 Moreover, Indian trust property cannot be conveyed without the consent of the Secretary of the Interior. In re Marriage of Wellman, 258 Mont. 131, 137, 852 P.2d 559, 563 (1993) (citing Tooahnippah v. Hickel, 397 U.S. 598, 609, 90 S.Ct. 1316, 1323, 25 L.Ed.2d 600 (1970)). We stated in Wellman that although § 40-4-202(1), MCA, requires that a court equitably apportion marital property in a dissolution proceeding, strong federal and tribal interests in trust property mandate[d] [the court's] conclusion that § 40-4-202(1), MCA, cannot be construed to require or allow adjudication of Indian trust land by a state district court. Wellman, 258 Mont. at 138, 852 P.2d at 563. And, we concluded in that case that any effort to assert state court jurisdiction over Indian trust land by figuratively bringing it into state court for valuation prior to an ordered sale and division of proceeds or a monetary award equal to [a spouse's] equitable share of the value of the land would result in a prohibited adjudication of interests in Indian trust land. Wellman, 258 Mont. at 139, 852 P.2d at 564. ¶ 42 Accordingly, we hold that the District Court erred in including in LaMoine's share of the marital estate the value of the tribal trust land that she leases. Thus we remand to the District Court for revaluation of the marital estate excluding the $10,000 value the court erroneously assigned to the tribal trust land. ¶ 43 Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. We Concur: W. WILLIAM LEAPHART, MICHAEL E. WHEAT, JIM RICE and BRIAN MORRIS.