ESTATE OF SCHANBACHER

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 14605 THE s P? R UFE E CW O THE STATE O MXI?ANA O F F -- I N THE IWlTER OF THE ESTATE RALPH I. scxmEAm, Deceased. Appeal f m : D i s t r i c t Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District, Honorable Nat Allen, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant : Robert L. Stephens, Jr., Billings, mntana For Respondent : Berger, Anderson, Sinclair & Murphy, Billings, l ~ n t a n a Efmer Dolve, Billings, mntana Suhnitted on briefs: Nbrch 29, 1979 Decided: Filed: MAY 8 9 198 -. - . MAY 3 0 1979 J u s t i c e J o h n Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n of t h e Court. Mr. T h i s a p p e a l i s from a summary judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t , 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 , County of Y e l l o w s t o n e , t h e Honorable N a t A l l e n p r e s i d i n g . The summary judgment was d a t e d September 1 9 , 1978, and was g r a n t e d on a m o t i o n on behalf of E d i t h E l l i s , t h e p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e h e r e i n , i n i t s e n t i r e t y and d i s m i s s i n g t h e p e t i t i o n s o f E l s i e L e s t e r , M a r g a r e t J o a n Lester, and R o b e r t a L o u i s e Lester w i t h prejudice. The c o u r t a l s o d e n i e d a m o t i o n f o r summary judgment o f E l s i e L e s t e r , M a r g a r e t J o a n L e s t e r , and R o b e r t a Louise Lester. I n t h i s o p i n i o n , Ralph I . S c h a n b a c h e r , t h e d e c e a s e d h e r e i n , w i l l b e r e f e r r e d t o a s "Ralph" a n d E l s i e J a n e L e s t e r , one of t h e a p p e l l a n t s , w i l l b e r e f e r r e d t o a s "Elsie". Ralph I . S c h a n b a c h e r , a l s o known a s Ralph I . L e s t e r , m a r r i e d N o r v a l l F e r n J o h n s o n o n November 8, 1 9 1 6 , i n Newton, Kansas. T h e r e were f o u r c h i l d r e n b o r n o f t h i s marriage including Edith E l l i s , t h e personal r e p r e s e n t a t i v e herein. This marriage continued u n t i l Fern's death i n B i l l i n g s , Montana, i n September 1973. Throughout h i s l i f e Ralph was a c a t t l e b u y e r . He also owned and o p e r a t e d s e v e r a l r a n c h p r o p e r t i e s and a f e e d l o t a t Lewistown, Montana. I n t h i s b u s i n e s s h e was r e q u i r e d t o s p e n d c o n s i d e r a b l e t i m e on t h e r o a d and away from h i s f a m i l y . T h i s was s o n o t o n l y d u r i n g h i s m a r r i a g e t o F e r n , b u t l a t e r , i n h i s l i v i n g arrangement w i t h E l s i e . E l s i e was t h e widow o f Norman Lester, a n d was i n t r o d u c e d t o Ralph by Norman L e s t e r , who i n t r o d u c e d Ralph a s h i s c o u s i n Ralph L e s t e r . E l s i e m e t Ralph i n 1947 when s h e was working i n a c o f f e e s h o p i n A m a r i l l o , Texas, b u t i t w a s n o t u n t i l a f t e r t h e d e a t h of h e r husband Norman t h a t t h e y began t o d a t e , some- t i m e i n t h e y e a r 1952. Ralph t o l d E l s i e t h a t he had been m a r r i e d b u t t h a t h i s wife w a s deceased. A f t e r going t o g e t h e r f o r a p e r i o d o f t i m e , they discussed marriage and, according t o E l s i e , they went t o C l o v i s , N e w Mexico, where on November 1 4 , 1952, a wedding ceremony w a s performed i n t h e home of a congregational minister. A y e a r o r s o l a t e r , E l s i e found o u t t h a t Ralph d i d have a n o t h e r w i f e and t h a t h i s name was Schanbacher. When c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n , Ralph t o l d E l s i e t h a t he d i d n o t l i v e w i t h F e r n , d i d n o t c a r e f o r h e r , and t h a t he merely used t h e name of Schanbacher as a b u s i n e s s name. I n h e r d e p o s i t i o n , E l s i e s t a t e d t h a t when s h e g o t t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n , s h e was w o r r i e d a b o u t a p o s s i b l e bigamy c h a r g e a g a i n s t Ralph, t h a t t h e y l o v e d e a c h o t h e r , and t h a t because he assured h e r t h a t he d i d n o t c a r e f o r h i s f i r s t w i f e and was n o t l i v i n g w i t h h e r , s h e d i d n o t t a k e any legal action. A t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f h e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h Ralph, E l s i e had t h r e e c h i l d r e n , two boys by h e r f i r s t m a r r i a g e which had ended i n a d i v o r c e , and a g i r l by h e r m a r r i a g e t o Norman L e s t e r , who was k i l l e d i n a n a u t o m o b i l e a c c i d e n t . Through- o u t t h e p e r i o d t h a t s h e l i v e d w i t h Ralph, h e s u p p o r t e d t h e s e c h i l d r e n and claimed them a s h i s own. Ralph and E l s i e a l s o had two c h i l d r e n , M a r g a r e t J o a n Lester born J u n e 7 , 1956, i n A m a r i l l o , Texas, and Xoberta L o u i s e L e s t e r born September 1 4 , 1960, i n A m a r i l l o . On b o t h b i r t h c e r t i f i c a t e s t h e name Ralph I . Lester i s g i v e n as t h e f a t h e r . Ralph and E l s i e l i v e d t o g e t h e r i n A m a r i l l o , Texas, where t h e y purchased a home and l i v e d u n t i l 1957; t h e y l i v e d i n A u s t i n , Texas, b r i e f l y ; and t h e y l i v e d i n ~ i l l i n g s n a i m o t e l f o r a s h o r t p e r i o d o f t i m e a n d l a t e r r e n t e d a home, a l t h o u g h Ralph c o n t i n u e d t o t r a v e l e x t e n s i v e l y i n h i s c a t t l e buying v e n t u r e s . A f t e r 1957 t h e c o u p l e l i v e d i n A m a r i l l o , Texas; Denver, C C o l o r a d o ; ~ i l e s i t y , idontana; G r e a t F a l l s , Montana; ~ ~ I i s s o u l a , Montana; C a s p e r , Wyoming; and a t o n e t i m e , t h e y l i v e d for a p e r i o d o f two y e a r s i n Lewistown, Montana, where t h e y p u r c h a s e d a home. I n a d d i t i o n , t h e y owned a home i n F l o r e n c e , Montana, and r e n t e d p r o p e r t y i n B u t t e , Bozeman, and Cheyenne, Wyoming. A l l o f t h i s p r o p e r t y was p u r c h a s e d o r r e n t e d u n d e r I n 1972 R a l p h s u f f e r e d a t h e name o f Ralph I . L e s t e r . s t r o k e i n B i l l i n g s , and E l s i e came t o B i l l i n g s and s t a y e d w i t h him a t t h e P o n d e r o s a I n n . She r e t u r n e d f o r a s h o r t p e r i o d o f t i m e t o Cheyenne, where t h e y had been l i v i n g , a n d t h e n r e t u r n e d t o B i l l i n g s a t which t i m e t h e y r e n t e d a m o b i l e home. During t h i s t i m e R a l p h ' s f i r s t w i f e d i e d , which was i n September 1973. I n March 1974 Ralph and E l s i e moved t o 3304 W i n c h e l l Lane i n B i l l i n g s , where t h e y r e n t e d a n a p a r t m e n t and l i v e d t o g e t h e r a s husband and w i f e u n t i l h i s d e a t h . While l i v i n g i n t h i s a p a r t m e n t u n d e r t h e name o f L e s t e r , Ralph had a n u n l i s t e d t e l e p h o n e number i n s t a l l e d u n d e r t h e name Schanbacher f o r business purposes. A f f i d a v i t s w e r e s u b m i t t e d by n e i g h b o r s and f r i e n d s o f Ralph and E l s i e t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t t h e y s o c i a l i z e d w i t h Ralph and E l s i e , had d i n n e r s t o g e t h e r , v i s i t e d e a c h o t h e r ' s f a m i l i e s , and t h a t t h e s e f r i e n d s and n e i g h b o r s r e c o g n i z e d E l s i e and Ralph a s husband and w i f e and t h a t t h e y h e l d t h e m s e l v e s o u t t o b e t h e same. D u r i n g t h e 24 y e a r s t h a t Ralph and E l s i e l i v e d t o g e t h e r , according t o E l s i e , he provided f o r her very w e l l and a l s o f o r h e r c h i l d r e n . While t h e y d i d have f i n a n c i a l h a r d s h i p s , he had n e v e r wanted h e r t o work. While l i v i n g i n ~ i l l i n g s ,Ralph r e f e r r e d t o h i s f i r s t w i f e , F e r n , a s "Aunt F e r n " , and h i s d a u g h t e r J o a n knew h e r a s Aunt F e r n . After F e r n ' s d e a t h , Ralph wanted t h e f a m i l y t o move i n t o h i s home o n Delphinium Avenue, b u t E l s i e s a i d s h e w a s r e l u c t a n t t o move t h e r e b e c a u s e t h e home c o n t a i n e d F e r n ' s f u r n i t u r e and possessions. A l s o , t h e house was u s e d by t h e c h i l d r e n of h i s o t h e r marriage a s a stopover place while v i s i t i n g i n Billings. However, Ralph, E l s i e and J o a n d i d c a r e f o r t h i s s e c o n d home and went t h e r e a t l e a s t o n c e a week t o c l e a n i t and c a r e f o r t h e y a r d . From 1952 u n t i l h i s d e a t h , Ralph and E l s i e Lester h e l d t h e m s e l v e s o u t a s husband and w i f e . V a r i o u s e x p e n s e s which w e r e i n c u r r e d d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w e r e p a i d f o r and r e c e i p t e d i n t h e name o f Ralph Lester. During R a l p h ' s f r e q u e n t buying t r i p s h e s e n t money t o E l s i e and t h e c h i l d r e n by Western Union a s Ralph Lester. F r i e n d s and n e i g h b o r s knew Ralph and E l s i e as husband and w i f e . They r e c e i v e d C h r i s t m a s c a r d s , wedding i n v i t a t i o n s , and o t h e r mail addressed t o M r . and M r s . Ralph L e s t e r . The p u b l i c s c h o o l s y s t e m r e c o g n i z e d t h e m a r r i a g e o f Ralph and E l s i e i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e e d u c a t i o n o f t h e i r c h i l d r e n , and t h e f a m i l y m e d i c a l r e c o r d s i n d i c a t e t h e m a r r i a g e s t a t u s of Ralph and E l s i e as do t h e b i r t h c e r t i f i c a t e s of t h e two c h i l d r e n . Ralph and E l s i e L e s t e r were l i s t e d i n t h e 1975 and 1976 B i l l i n g s C i t y D i r e c t o r y a s husband and w i f e . I t w a s n o t u n t i l Xalph's l a s t i l l n e s s t h a t E l s i e m e t any o f h i s c h i l d r e n o f h i s m a r r i a g e t o F e r n . An a f f i d a v i t s u b m i t t e d f o r t h e c o u r t ' s c o n s i d e r a t i o n by a n u r s e ' s a i d s t a t e d t h a t b e c a u s e E l s i e had been i n s u c h c o n s t a n t a t t e n i d a n c e of Ralph d u r i n g h i s l a s t i l l n e s s , s h e a s k e d ~ l s i e , n t h e p r e s e n c e o f R a l p h ' s c h i l d r e n by F e r n , what r e l a t i o n s h i p s h e was. E l s i e i d e n t i f i e d h e r s e l f a s a " f r i e n d " and n o t a s t h e w i f e o f Ralph. E l s i e a n s w e r s t h a t s h e d i d n o t want t o e m b a r r a s s t h e c h i l d r e n o f t h e f i r s t m a r r i a g e by r e v e a l i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s h e had had w i t h t h e i r f a t h e r . A t the t i m e of R a l p h ' s d e a t h , h i s o l d e s t daughter E d i t h took charge o f t h e f u n e r a l , and h e was b u r i e d b e s i d e h i s f i r s t w i f e F e r n . Ralph f i l e d a j o i n t income t a x u n d e r t h e name o f Schanb a c h e r and g i v i n g h i s w i f e ' s name a s F e r n u n t i l 1972. T h e r e a f t e r , h e f i l e d a s a " s i n g l e man." I n 1975 Ralph made a W i l l i n which h e f a i l e d t o m e n t i o n t h a t h e had a w i f e , t h e a p p e l l a n t E l s i e , and t h a t h e had two c h i l d r e n by h e r . F o l l o w i n g R a l p h ' s d e a t h on November 11, 1976, t h i s W i l l was submitted t o probate. The W i l l was s u b m i t t e d by E d i t h E l l i s , o n e o f h i s d a u g h t e r s , who f i l e d a n a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a n i n f o r m a l p r o b a t e o f t h e W i l l and t o b e a p p o i n t e d p e r s o n a l representative therein. On November 1 5 , a n o r d e r of i n - f o r m a l p r o b a t e of t h e W i l l and t h e a p p o i n t m e n t o f t h e p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e w a s s i g n e d by t h e c l e r k o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t and l e t t e r s w e r e i s s u e d t o E d i t h E l l i s a s personal representative. On F e b r u a r y 2 , 1977, t h e demand f o r bond and t h e demand f o r n o t i c e w e r e f i l e d by E l s i e a s a s u r v i v i n g w i f e o f Ralph a n d t h e mother o f t h e two s u r v i v i n g c h i l d r e n , M a r g a r e t J o a n L e s t e r and R o b e r t a L o u i s e Lester. On t h e f o l l o w i n g d a y , a p e t i t i o n f o r s u p e r v i s e d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and a n o t i c e of c l a i m a n d p e t i t i o n by p r e t e r m i t t e d c h i l d r e n w e r e f i l e d . An amended v e r i f i e d p e t i t i o n f o r s u p e r v i s e d a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and t h e amended n o t i c e o f c l a i m and p e t i t i o n by p r e t e r m i t t e d c h i l d r e n w e r e s e r v e d i n t h i s m a t t e r on F e b r u a r y 1 0 , 1977. hereafter, E l s i e f i l e d on May 4 , 1977, a p e t i t i o n f o r f a m i l y a l l o w a n c e , p e t i t i o n f o r exempt p r o p e r t y , p e t i t i o n f o r a homestead a l l o w a n c e , and a widow's e l e c t i v e s h a r e t h e r e i n . On August 1 8 , 1977, t h e d e p o s i t i o n of E l s i e was t a k e n i n t h i s matter. On November 3 , 1977, t h e p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a - t i v e f i l e d a memorandum and m o t i o n f o r summary judgment. H e a r i n g on t h e motion was s e t f o r November 2 8 , 1977, b u t t h e h e a r i n g was n o t h e l d . The m a t t e r was f i n a l l y h e a r d i n Se2tember 1978, a t which t i m e f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s o f law w e r e made by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t . On October 1 3 , 1978, a b r i e f h e a r i n g was h e l d i n t h e chambers on p e t i t i o n e r ' s motion t o amend t h e f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s o f law, which was d e n i e d by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t on O c t o b e r 1 3 , 1978. W e need n o t s e t f o r t h t h e i s s u e s a s s t a t e d by c o u n s e l on a p p e a l , b u t s e t them f o r t h below a s w e see c o n t r o l l i n g i n t h i s case. Here t h e r e a r e g e n u i n e i s s u e s o f m a t e r i a l f a c t p r e c l u d i n g summary judgment on t h e two f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s : 1. Whether t h e r e was a common law m a r r i a g e between Ralph and E l s i e a f t e r t h e d e a t h of F e r n ? 2. Are t h e two c h i l d r e n o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f Ralph a n d E l s i e t o b e c o n s i d e r e d i s s u e of t h e m a r r i a g e of t h e decedent? While t h e 1952 m a r r i a g e between t h e s e p a r t i e s was p r o h i b i t e d by v i r t u e of R a l p h ' s p r e e x i s t i n g m a r r i a g e t o F e r n , upon h e r d e a t h i n September 1973, a f a c t q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r t h i s impediment t o t h e m a r r i a g e was removed i s r a i s e d by o u r s t a t u t e . S e e S t e v e n s v . Woodmen o f t h e w o r l d ( 1 9 3 7 ) , 105 Mont. 1 2 1 , 71 P.2d 898, 905. From documents s u b m i t t e d by E l s i e , t h e r e was e v i d e n c e t h a t , a f t e r t h e d e a t h of F e r n , Ralph and E l s i e l i v e d t o g e t h e r a s man and w i f e , f i r s t i n a m o b i l e home i n t h e Lockwood a d d i t i o n , a n d t h e n i n a n a p a r t m e n t a t 3304 W i n c h e l l Lane. They l i v e d a t t h i s r e s i d e n c e u n t i l R a l p h ' s d e a t h on November 11, 1976. Fol- l o w i n g F e r n ' s d e a t h , t h e c h i l d r e n o f t h e second u n i o n and E l s i e and Ralph c a r e d f o r t h e r e s i d e n c e t h a t had been p u r - c h a s e d by Ralph f o r h i s w i f e F e r n , l o o k i n g a f t e r t h e lawn, e t c . , and m a i n t a i n i n g t h e p r o p e r t y u n t i l R a l p h ' s d e a t h . From t h e r e c o r d b e f o r e t h e c o u r t , t h e s e f a c t s w e r e n o t c o n t e s t e d by t h e p e r s o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . Therefore, a q u e s t i o n a r i s e s u n d e r s e c t i o n 48-310(2),R.C.N. s e c t i o n 40-1-401(2) MCA, 1 9 4 7 , now a s t o w h e t h e r o r n o t E l s i e and Ralph w e r e l a w f u l l y married. I n 1975, t h e Montana L e g i s l a t u r e e n a c t e d t h e n a t i o n a l d r a f t o f t h e Uniform M a r r i a g e and D i v o r c e A c t , which became s e c t i o n s 48-301 t h r o u g h 48-341, R.C.M. 40-1-101 S e c t i o n 48-302, t h r o u g h 40-4-220 now s e c t i o n s 40-1-101 MCA. and 40-4-101 MCA, 1947, now s e c t i o n s R.C.M. 1947, set f o r t h t h e pur- pose of t h e A c t a s follows: " T h i s a c t s h a l l b e l i b e r a l l y c o n s t r u e d and app l i e d t o promote i t s u n d e r l y i n g p u r p o s e s , which a r e to: " ( 1 ) p r o v i d e adequate procedures f o r t h e solemniz a t i o n and r e g i s t r a t i o n o f m a r r i a g e ; " ( 2 ) s t r e n g t h e n and p r e s e r v e t h e i n t e g r i t y o f marriage and safeguard family r e l a t i o n s h i p s ; " ( 3 ) promote t h e a m i c a b l e s e t t l e m e n t o f d i s p u t e s t h a t have a r i s e n between p a r t i e s t o a m a r r i a g e ; " ( 4 ) m i t i g a t e t h e p o t e n t i a l harm t o t h e s p o u s e s a n d t h e i r c h i l d r e n c a u s e d by t h e p r o c e s s o f l e g a l d i s s o l u t i o n of marriage; " ( 5 ) make r e a s o n a b l e p r o v i s i o n f o r s p o u s e and minor c h i l d r e n d u r i n g and a f t e r l i t i g a t i o n ; and " ( 6 ) make t h e law o f l e g a l d i s s o l u t i o n o f m a r r i a g e e f f e c t i v e f o r d e a l i n g w i t h t h e r e a l i t i t e s of mat r i m o n i a l e x p e r i e n c e by making i r r e t r i e v a b l e b r e a k down of t h e m a r r i a g e r e l a t i o n s h i p t h e s o l e b a s i s f o r i t s dissolution." S e c t i o n 48-310 ( 2 ) , R.C.M. 1947, now s e c t i o n 40-1-401 ( 2 ) MCA, provides : " ( 2 ) P a r t i e s t o a m a r r i a g e p r o h i b i t e d under t h i s s e c t i o n who c o h a b i t a f t e r removal o f t h e impediment a r e l a w f u l l y m a r r i e d a s o f t h e d a t e of t h e removal o f t h e impediment." The above s t a t u t e s embody a p r o g r e s s i v e p o l i c y l o n g f o l l o w e d by s u c h c o u r t s a s t h e C i r c u i t C o u r t of Appeals of t h e D i s t r i c t Columbia which h e l d i n Matthews v . B r i t t o n (D.C. Cir. 1 9 6 2 ) , 303 F.2d 408, 409: " N e v e r t h e l e s s , a s l o n g a s t h e impediment of E a r n e s t i n e ' s l a w f u l m a r r i a g e t o Johnson e x i s t e d , s h e and Harry Matthews c o u l d n o t l a w f u l l y b e o r become husband and w i f e . However, i t i s s e t t l e d t h a t i f p a r t i e s a g r e e t o b e husband and w i f e i n i g n o r a n c e of a n impediment t o l a w f u l matrimony, t h e n t h e removal o f t h a t impediment r e s u l t s i n a common-law m a r r i a g e between t h e p a r t i e s i f t h e y have c o n t i n u e d t o c o h a b i t and l i v e t o g e t h e r a s t h e same r e s u l t o b t a i n s husband and w i f e even i f p a r t i e s have knowledge of t h e impediment I t is not a t t h e t i m e t h e y a g r e e d t o be m a r r i e d . t o b e e x p e c t e d t h a t p a r t i e s once having a g r e e d t o b e m a r r i e d w i l l deem i t n e c e s s a r y t o a g r e e t o do s o a g a i n when a n e a r l i e r m a r r i a g e i s t e r m i n a t e d o r some o t h e r ban t o union i s e l i m i n a t e d . " . . . S e e , t h e Commission Comment t o S e c t i o n 2 0 7 ( b ) , Uniform M a r r i a g e and D i v o r c e A c t , 9 U.L.A. 470. I n a d d i t i o n , had n o t s e c t i o n 48-310(2) been e n a c t e d , t h e f a c t remains t h a t E l s i e c o u l d , under t h e f a c t s i t u a t i o n p r e s e n t e d t o t h e C o u r t h e r e , s t i l l have been a s u r v i v i n g widow of Ralph by v i r t u e of a v a l i d common law m a r r i a g e a f t e r t h e d e a t h o f F e r n i n 1973. Montana h a s l o n g recog- n i z e d t h e v a l i d i t y o f common law m a r r i a g e s and t h i s i s c a r r i e d forward i n t h e Uniform M a r r i a g e and Divorce Act i n s e c t i o n 48-314, R.C.M. 1947, now s e c t i o n 40-1-403 NCA. The second i s s u e of whether t h e c h i l d r e n of t h e union of t h e s e two p e o p l e a r e i s s u e of t h e d e c e d e n t i s a f a c t i s s u e which c a n n o t b e d e c i d e d by summary judgment. When t h e Uniform M a r r i a g e and Divorce Act was a d o p t e d by o u r l e g i s l a - t u r e , s e v e r a l s e c t i o n s w e r e devoted t o t h e p r o t e c t i o n of t h e c h i l d r e n of a marriage. These r e l a t e t o s t r e n g t h e n i n g and p r e s e r v i n g t h e i n t e g r i t y o f m a r r i a g e and s a f e g u a r d i n g f a m i l y r e l a t i o n s h i p s ; t o t h e promotion of s e t t l e m e n t of d i s p u t e s ; t o m i t i g a t i o n o f harm t o s p o u s e s a n d t h e i r c h i l d r e n c a u s e d by p r o c e s s o f l e g a l d i s s o l u t i o n o f m a r r i a g e ; and t o r e a s o n a b l e p r o v i s i o n s f o r a s p o u s e and minor c h i l d r e n a f t e r litigation. These i t e m s s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e f a c t s i t u a - t i o n w e have h e r e . The q u e s t i o n t o b e d e c i d e d on a m o t i o n f o r summary judgment i s w h e t h e r t h e r e i s a g e n u i n e i s s u e o f m a t e r i a l f a c t and n o t how t h a t i s s u e s h o u l d b e d e t e r m i n e d . Baylor v. J a c o b s o n ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 170 Mont. 234, 552 P.2d 55; F u l t o n v . C l a r k ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 167 Mont. 399, 538 P.2d 1371. W e have f u r t h e r n o t e d t h a t summary judgment i s n o t a p r o p e r t o o l f o r r e s o l v i n g d i s p u t e d i s s u e s o f f a c t a n d i s a c c o r d i n g l y i m p r o p e r whenever a material factual matter is i n dispute. Putnam ( 1 9 7 7 ) , Mont. , 571 P.2d 368, 34 S t . R e p . 1241; Duncan v . Rockwell I'lfg. Co. 567 P . 2d 936, 34 S t . R e p . Mont. 408, 543 P.2d 379. Engebretson v. (1977), Mont. 821; Bahm v . Dormanen ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 168 I n Engebretson, t h i s Court noted: "The p u r p o s e o f t h e summary judgment p r o c e d u r e i s t o e n c o u r a g e j u d i c i a l economy t h r o u g h t h e e i l i m i n a t i o n o f u n n e c e s s a r y t r i a l , d e l a y and expense. [ C i t a t i o n s omitted.] Summary judgment i s n o t a s u b s t i t u t e f o r t r i a l , however, and i s i n a p p r o p r i a t e when g e n u i n e i s s u e s o f m a t e r i a l 571 P.2d a t f a c t remain t o be l i t i g a t e d 370. . . ." F o r t h e r e a s o n s above s e t f o r t h , t h e summary judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t Court i s reversed. f o r t r i a l on t h e m e r i t s . I The m a t t e r i s remanded We concur: Ch' f Justlce t g

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.