Court Opinion

ID: 9398257
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-30 17:08:06.068011+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:21.133194
License: Public Domain

FILED
                                                                     IN THE OFFICE OF THE
                                                                  CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
                                                                          MAY 30, 2023
                                                                   STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                 IN THE SUPREME COURT
                 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                                2023 ND 98

Jennifer Marie Gwilliams,                             Plaintiff and Appellant
     v.
Terry Lynn Gwilliams,                                Defendant and Appellee

                               No. 20220149

Appeal from the District Court of Barnes County, Southeast Judicial District,
the Honorable Jay A. Schmitz, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Opinion of the Court by McEvers, Justice.

Lacey R. Garrison (argued) and Adam P. Richard (on brief), Fargo, ND, for
plaintiff and appellant.

Thomas R. George (argued) and Krista L. Andrews (on brief), Fargo, ND, for
defendant and appellee.
                           Gwilliams v. Gwilliams
                                No. 20220149

McEvers, Justice.

[¶1] Jennifer Gwilliams appeals from a district court order denying her
motion for N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) relief from a divorce judgment. She also appeals
from an order denying her motion for contempt and granting Terry Gwilliams’
motion to stay enforcement of the judgment pending disposition of this appeal.
We affirm.

[¶2] Jennifer Gwilliams argues her appeal divested the district court of
jurisdiction to enter the stay. We disagree. Whether to stay enforcement of a
judgment pending appeal is a collateral matter within the district court’s
jurisdiction. See N.D.R.App.P. 8(a)(1)(A) (a party must ordinarily move first in
the district court for a stay of the judgment pending appeal); N.D.R.Civ.P. 62(b)
(a party may obtain a stay after judgment is entered by providing a bond or
other security); Holkesvig v. Grove, 2014 ND 57, ¶ 16, 844 N.W.2d 557 (district
courts retain jurisdiction to decide matters that arise subsequent to the
judgment and are collateral to the issues on appeal); Verry v. Murphy, 163
N.W.2d 721, 725 (N.D. 1968) (“The stay of an execution upon appeal is an
independent and collateral proceeding[.]”); Bonde v. Stern, 8 N.W.2d 457, 461
(N.D. 1943) (“The district court does not become shorn of power in a stay
proceeding when an appeal is taken from the order or judgment the execution
or performance of which is sought to be stayed.”)

[¶3] Jennifer Gwilliams also argues the district court abused its discretion
when it denied her motion for N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) post-judgment relief and her
motion for contempt. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). See
Davis v. Davis, 2021 ND 24, ¶ 5, 955 N.W.2d 117 (“The standard of review for
motions under Rule 60(b) is abuse of discretion.”); Canerdy v. Canerdy, 2022
ND 61, ¶ 8, 971 N.W.2d 873 (“We will not disturb a district court’s contempt
determination unless the court abused its discretion.”)

                                       2
[¶4] Terry Gwilliams argues the appeal is frivolous and requests we award
sanctions on appeal. We decline to do so. The district court’s orders are
affirmed.

[¶5] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
     Daniel J. Crothers
     Lisa Fair McEvers
     Jerod E. Tufte
     Douglas A. Bahr

                                   3