CITY OF BILLINGS v WEATHERWAX

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 80-433 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1981 CITY OF BILLINGS, Plaintiff and Respondent, VS . DOUGLAS WEATHERWAX, Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from: District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District, In and for the County of Yellowstone. Honorable William J. Speare, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Terry L. Seiffert, Billings, Montana For Respondent : Joe Leckie, City Attorney, Billings, Montana Submitted on briefs: Decided: ~ilL2- Filed: Clerk April 22, 1981 JUL 4 MI Mr. 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 the Court. Weatherwax t h e Opinion of a p p e a l s a Yellowstone County D i s t r i c t C o u r t c o n v i c t i o n f o r d r i v i n g under t h e i n f l u e n c e of a l c o h o l p u r s u a n t t o a C i t y of B i l l i n g s t r a f f i c o r d i n a n c e . D o u g l a s Weatherwax was c i t e d on A p r i l 2 9 , driving under v i o l a t i o n of the influence of s e c t i o n 11.40.020 of C i t y of B i l l i n g s . intoxicating 1980, f o r liquor t h e T r a f f i c Code o f in the The o r d i n a n c e p r o v i d e s : " I t i s u n l a w f u l and p u n i s h a b l e a s p r o v i d e d i n S e c t i o n 1 1 . 4 0 . 0 5 0 f o r any p e r s o n who i s under t h e i n f l u e n c e o f a l c o h o l t o a d e g r e e which r e n d e r s him i n c a p a b l e o f s a f e l y d r i v i n g a motor v e h i c l e t o d r i v e o r be i n a c t u a l p h y s i c a l c o n t r o l o f a n y motor v e h i c l e w i t h i n t h i s municipality." (Emphasis d e f e n d a n t ' s . ) On May 2 7 , 1980, trial was held and f o u n d t o be i n v i o l a t i o n o f t h e o r d i n a n c e . taken to the District trial in September Court, 1980. and On the July 2 d e f e n d a n t was A p p e a l was t h e n matter was defendant set for moved to d i s m i s s t h e c o m p l a i n t on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t t h e c i t y o r d i n a n c e did not comply w i t h therefore, invalid. section 61-8-401(1)(a), MCA, S e c t i o n 6 1 - 8 - 4 0 1 ( 1 ) ( a ) , MCA, and w a s , states: " I t is u n l a w f u l and p u n i s h a b l e a s p r o v i d e d i n f o r a n y p e r s o n who i s s e c t i o n 61-8-714(1) under t h e i n f l u e n c e o f : " ( a ) alcohol t o d r i v e or be i n a c t u a l p h y s i c a l c o n t r o l o f a motor v e h i c l e upon t h e highways of t h i s s t a t e . " (Emphasis defendant's. ) The D i s t r i c t C o u r t d e n i e d d e f e n d a n t ' s m o t i o n w i t h o u t opinion. On September defendant was influence i n v i o l a t i o n of Billings. The found 10, guilty 1980, of trial driving was t h e T r a f f i c Code o f and under while held the t h e C i t y of D e f e n d a n t now a p p e a l s . only question which this Court is asked to r e s o l v e is whether s e c t i o n 11.40.020 of t h e B i l l i n g s T r a f f i c Code c o n f l i c t s w i t h s t a t e law s o a s t o make t h e o r d i n a n c e i n v a l i d i n exceeding t h e m u n i c i p a l i t y ' s j u r i s d i c t i o n . Over the fundamental years principles this Court with has regard to s t a t e s t a t u t e s and c i t y o r d i n a n c e s . municipalities in this state ( 1 9 5 6 ) , 130 Mont. t h a t of t h e s t a t e . with the only law o f interaction of such power as is C i t y of B i l l i n g s v. Herold 1 3 8 , 296 P.2d 263. t h e two s o v e r e i g n s , the several Clearly, the organized have g r a n t e d them by t h e l e g i s l a t u r e . developed Moreover, a s between t h e c i t y ' s a u t h o r i t y is s u b o r d i n a t e t o A m u n i c i p a l o r d i n a n c e m u s t be i n harmony the state. S t a t e v. Haswell ( 1 9 6 6 ) , 147 Mont. 492, 414 P.2d 652. The r e l a t i v e l y n a r r o w q u e s t i o n b e f o r e u s , is whether t h e p r o v i s i o n s of therefore, section 61-8-401(1)(a), a r e harmonious w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s of MCA, s e c t i o n 11.40.020 of W e find t h a t they t h e T r a f f i c Code o f t h e C i t y o f B i l l i n g s . are. The legislature authority to Billings has local gone ordinance w i l l we has seen governments, beyond that invalidate persuaded that state prohibits and either the in expressly as the C i t y of enacting or the impliedly i n v a l i d a t i o n of City of Jackson if certain I n d o i n g s o w e m u s t be i s n o t t o be u n d e r t a k e n l i g h t l y by v. grant only laws Kodiak to authority it. such an ordinance, 1a.w f i t local t h i s Court. (Alaska 1978), 584 P.2d See 1130, 1132-33. Section "[regulate] influence of or 61-12-101(12), [prohibit] any intoxicating liquor MCA, empowers person who a is from d r i v i n g o r city under being to the in actual physical control of any vehicle within the i n c o r p o r a t e d l i m i t s o f any c i t y o r t o w n . " This Court's one. The consttutional legislature has license expressly is not granted the B i l l i n g s t h e a u t h o r i t y t o a d o p t s u c h an o r d i n a n c e . t h a t t h e C i t y used a poetic City of The f a c t language t h a t d i d l e s s than mirror the c o r r e s p o n d i n g s t a t e s t a t u t e d o e s n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y make t h e ordinance defendant's section when an invalid belief that 61-8-401(1)(a), that section 61-12-101(12), MCA, is exercise of authority. the ordinance MCA, read may be is in t h e c o n f l i c t is r e s o l v e d . , conflict facially in p a r i materia 616 P.2d Although with persuasive, with section See M i l l e r v. Miller (1980), Mont. 313, 320, 37 St.Rep. 1523, 1529. The o r d i n a n c e h a s e v e r y a p p e a r a n c e o f b e i n g p r e c i s e l y what t h e l e g i s l a t u r e c o n t e m p l a t e d , and t h i s Court will not exalt the form of s u b s t a n c e of a n o t h e r t o i n v a l i d a t e i t . Af f i r m e d . W concur: e i / one statute over the

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.