Court Opinion

ID: 9508956
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:40:56.646998+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:42.114276
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE HARRISON,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in the majority’s opinion affirming the District Court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants; however, I dissent to this Court’s holding of not assessing sanctions/damages against the appellant, Samuel J. Grenz.
Samuel J. Grenz is not an unfamiliar litigant to this Court or to the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District, Flathead County. At the present time, this Court has four current or “open” cases *65pending our decision involving Samuel J. Grenz as the appellant; and four decided or “closed” cases involving Samuel J. Grenz as the appellant. The respondents in these appeals brought by Samuel J. Grenz have been required to hire counsel and go through the painful procedure required in the appeal’s process.
Rule 32, M.R.App.P., as stated in the majority opinion, notes that “If the supreme court is satisfied from the record and the presentation of the appeal in a civil case that the same was taken without substantial or reasonable grounds, such damages may be assessed. ...” After reviewing the record concerning Samuel J. Grenz, I am certainly satisfied and find it proper to assess sanctions/damages against Samuel J. Grenz in the amount of $250 and would so hold.