BRYMERSKI v CITY OF GREAT FALLS

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 81-108 I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF M N A A OTN 1981 J O H N BRYMERSKI AND ALICE BRYMI3RSK1, P l a i n t i f f s and A p p e l l a n t s , C I T Y OF GREAT FALLS, a m u n i c i p a l c o r p . o f t h e S t a t e of Montana, T O A C. H M S MATHER, SHIRLEY R. PAPPIN, P e r s o n a l Repres e n t a t i v e o f t h e E s t a t e o f R o b e r t F. Pappin, Defendants and Respondents. Appeal from: District Court o f t h e Eighth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e County o f C a s c a d e , The H o n o r a b l e J o e l G. Roth, J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . C o u n s e l o f Record: For Appellant: D z i v i , C o n k l i n & Nybo, G r e a t F a l l s , Montana For Respondent: S m i t h , B a i l l i e & Walsh, Great F a l l s , Montana Swanberg, Koby, Swanberg & M a t t e u c c i , Great F a l l s , Montana A l e x a n d e r & Baucus, Great F a l l s , Montana David G l i k o , G r e a t F a l l s , Montana Submitted on B r i e f s : Decided: Filed: l!4ov 2 5 1981 September 3 , m5f 21i 1981 M r . C h i e f J u s t i c e F r a n k I . H a s w e l l d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n of t h e Court. T h i s is a n a p p e a l b y p l a i n t i f f s from a n o r d e r o f t h e Eighth J u d i c i a l District Court g r a n t i n g d e f e n d a n t s 1 motion t o d i s m i s s t h e p l a i n t i f f s 1 a c t i o n f o r f a i l u r e to p r o s e c u t e . We reverse. Between t h e summer o f 1 9 7 5 and t h e summer of 1 9 7 6 , d e f e n d a n t s R o b e r t and S h i r l e y P a p p i n and Thomas M a t h e r ( h e r e i n a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o as P a p p i n / M a t h e r ) were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of s t r e e t s , t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n o f c u r b s and g u t t e r s , and t h e e x c a v a t i o n of s o i l n e a r t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e p l a i n t i f f s 1 r e s i d e n c e i n t h e West H i l l A d d i t i o n t o t h e C i t y o f Great F a l l s , Montana. D u r i n g June and J u l y o f 1 9 7 6 , h e a v y r a i n f a l l s washed mud a n d f i l l d i r t from a " f i l l " area c r e a t e d b y P a p p i n / M a t h e r into t h e p l a i n t i f f s 1 y a r d and b a s e m e n t c a u s i n g damage to t h e p l a i n t i f f s 1 property. The p l a i n t i f f s f i l e d a c o m p l a i n t a g a i n s t t h e d e f e n d a n t s on J u l y 1 4 , 1 9 7 6 , s e e k i n g damages f o r n e g l i g e n c e a n d f o r b r e a c h o f a w r i t t e n a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n P a p p i n / M a t h e r and t h e C i t y of Great F a l l s . On A u g u s t 3 , 1 9 7 6 , d e f e n d a n t s P a p p i n / M a t h e r f i l e d a m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s , and a h e a r i n g w a s s c h e d u l e d f o r S e p t e m b e r 1 5 , 1 9 7 6 , t o h e a r o r a l a r g u m e n t s on t h e m o t i o n . T h e r e is n o t h i n g i n t h e r e c o r d t o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t r u l e d on t h i s m o t i o n . On O c t o b e r 8, 1 9 7 6 , P a p p i n / M a t h e r f i l e d a n a n s w e r , and o n October 12 they f i l e d w r i t t e n i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s . On November 1 5 , t h e C i t y o f G r e a t F a l l s f i l e d c o n s o l i d a t e d m o t i o n s t o d i s m i s s , t o make more d e f i n i t e and c e r t a i n and to strike. O r a l a r g u m e n t s on t h e s e m o t i o n s were s e t f o r December 1 5 , b u t it d o e s n o t a p p e a r t h a t t h e s e m o t i o n s were r u l e d o n by t h e District Court. N o t h i n g f u r t h e r w a s f i l e d i n r e g a r d to t h i s a c t i o n u n t i l May 1 6 , 1 9 8 0 . I n J a n u a r y , 1 9 7 9 , J o h n McCarvel , the p l a i n t i f f s ' attorney, became a j u d g e and s h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r he a d v i s e d t h e p l a i n t i f f s t o f i n d a new a t t o r n e y . I n F e b r u a r y of t h a t y e a r , t h e p l a i n t i f f s c o n t a c t e d W i l l i a m C o n k l i n and a s k e d him t o r e p r e s e n t them. Mr. Conklin informed t h e p l a i n t i f f s on March 6 t h a t he would t a k e t h e i r c a s e , and h e d i d some p r e l i m i n a r y r e s e a r c h d u r i n g March and A p r i l . H e was u n a b l e t o f i n d t i m e to f u r t h e r proceed w i t h t h e c a s e , however, u n t i l May, 1 9 8 0 ; and d u r i n g t h e i n t e r i m p e r i o d o n e o f t h e d e f e n d a n t s , Robert Pappin, d i e d . On May 1 6 , 1 9 8 0 , p l a i n t i f f s f i l e d a d o c u m e n t t o s u b s t i t u t e c o u n s e l and a m o t i o n t o s u b s t i t u t e S h i r l e y R. Pappin, personal r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e e s t a t e o f R o b e r t F. P a p p i n , f o r R o b e r t P a p p i n as a p a r t y d e f e n d a n t . The D i s t r i c t C o u r t g r a n t e d t h e m o t i o n on May 2 9 , 1 9 8 0 . Then i n June p l a i n t i f f s f i l e d a n s w e r s to t h e P a p p i n / M a t h e r i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s o f 1 9 7 6 and s e r v e d w r i t t e n i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s o n d e f e n d a n t s Pappin/Mather and d e f e n d a n t C i t y o f G r e a t F a l l s . I n S e p t e m b e r , ~ a p p i n / M a t h e r f i l e d t h e i r a n s w e r s to p l a i n t i f f s ' i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s and a l s o f i l e d a m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e to p r o s e c u t e . A f t e r t h e m o t i o n to d i s m i s s was f i l e d , t h e p l a i n t i f f s d e p o s e d s e v e r a l i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h knowledge o f f a c t s p e r t i n e n t to t h e case. On November 1 0 , a h e a r i n g was h e l d on t h e P a p p i n / M a t h e r motion t o d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e t o prosecute. A t the hearing the C i t y o f Great F a l l s o r a l l y j o i n e d i n t h e m o t i o n . On J a n u a r y 9 , 1981, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s s u e d an o r d e r g r a n t i n g t h e motion to d i s m i s s , and t h e p l a i n t i f f s a p p e a l . The p l a i n t i f f s r a i s e t h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s o n a p p e a l : 1. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t Court e r r e d i n n o t c o n s i d e r i n g t h e s t a t u t o r y time p e r i o d s e t f o r t h i n R u l e 4 1 ( e ) , M.R.Civ.P., when making i t s d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e to p r o s e c u t e . 2. Whether t h e District Court abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n g r a n t i n g t h e m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e t o p r o s e c u t e as t h e f a i l u r e t o a c t i v e l y p r o s e c u t e t h e case was d u e t o i n a c t i o n o n t h e p a r t of p l a i n t i f £ s f a t t o r n e y s . 3. Whether t h e ~ i s t r i c t ourt e r r e d i n g r a n t i n g t h e C m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e t o p r o s e c u t e as t h e case was b e i n g a c t i v e l y p r o s e c u t e d f o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h r e e and o n e - h a 1 f m o n t h s p r i o r t o t h e t i m e t h e m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s was f i l e d . 4. W h e t h e r t h e p l a i n t i f f s were e n t i t l e d t o r e l y o n t h e local District Court custom of g i v i n g n o t i c e b e f o r e d i s m i s s i n g i n a c t i v e cases. 5. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t Court e r r e d i n g r a n t i n g t h e m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s f o r l a c k o f p r o s e c u t i o n as t h e n o t i c e r e c e i v e d b y t h e p l a i n t i f f s to a p p o i n t new c o u n s e l was n o t g i v e n i n t h e s p e c i f i c manner p r e s c r i b e d by t h e local c o u r t r u l e . 6. W h e t h e r t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n r e f u s i n g to a d m i t c e r t a i n of p l a i n t i f f s f e x h i b i t s i n t o evidence a t t h e hearing on t h e motion to d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e to p r o s e c u t e . W f i n d t h a t o n l y t h e t h i r d i s s u e n e e d s t o be a d d r e s s e d i n e r e a c h i n g a d e c i s i o n i n t h i s case. The r u l e o f c i v i l p r o c e d u r e which g o v e r n s t h e d i s m i s s a l o f a n a c t i o n f o r f a i l u r e t o p r o s e c u t e is Rule 4 1 ( b ) , M.R.Civ.P. It p r o v i d e s i n p a r t as f o l l o w s : ... " F o r f a i l u r e o f t h e p l a i n t i f f to p r o s e c u t e a d e f e n d a n t may move f o r d i s m i s s a l o f a n a c t i o n ... II I n Montana t h e l a w is w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t a n a c t i o n may b e d i s m i s s e d f o r f a i l u r e o f t h e p l a i n t i f f to p r o s e c u t e i f t h e a c t i o n is n o t p r o s e c u t e d w i t h d u e d i l i g e n c e , a b s e n t a s u f f i c i e n t showing o f e x c u s e . p.2d Calaway v . J o n e s ( 1 9 7 8 ) , 1 7 7 Mont. 5 1 6 , 582 7 5 6 , and cases c i t e d t h e r e i n . I t is a l s o w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d i n Montana l a w t h a t it is w i t h i n t h e sound d i s c r e t i o n of t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o d i s m i s s a n a c t i o n f o r f a i l u r e o f t h e p l a i n t i f f to p r o s e c u t e . s u p r a , and cases t h e r e i n c i t e d . Calaway, W e a g r e e with t h e Colorado Court o f A p p e a l s , h o w e v e r , i n t h a t " [ t h e t r i a l c o u r t f s ] d i s c r e t i o n is n o t w i t h o u t bounds . . . and it m u s t be b o r n e i n mind t h a t c o u r t s ' e x i s t p r i m a r i l y t o a f f o r d a forum t o s e t t l e l i t i g a b l e matters between d i s p u t i n g p a r t i e s . ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 42 Colo.App. (1965) " F a r b e r v. G r e e n Shoe Mfg. C o . 2 5 5 , 596 P.2d 1 5 7 C O ~ O . 5 3 5 , 4 0 3 P.2d 3 9 8 , c i t i n g M i z a r v. J o n e s 767. I n t h i s case t h e p l a i n t i f f s had b e e n a c t i v e l y p r o s e c u t i n g t h e i r case f o r o v e r t h r e e and o n e - h a l f m o n t h s p r i o r t o t h e t i m e t h e d e f e n d a n t s Pappin/Mather f i l e d t h e i r motion to d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e to p r o s e c u t e . W a d o p t t h e r u l e t h a t a m o t i o n to d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e t o e p r o s e c u t e w i l l n o t be g r a n t e d i f t h e p l a i n t i f f is d i l i g e n t l y p r o s e c u t i n g h i s claim a t t h e t i m e t h e m o t i o n is f i l e d , e v e n i f a t some e a r l i e r t i m e t h e p l a i n t i f f may h a v e f a i l e d t o a c t w i t h d u e diligence . S u p p o r t f o r t h i s p o s i t i o n is found i n s e v e r a l j u r i s d i c tions. 1971) S e e F i r s t N a t i o n a l Bank o f F a i r b a n k s v. T a y l o r ( A l a s k a 488 P. 2d 1 0 2 6 ; F a r b e r , s u p r a ; A y e r s v. Sons, Inc. ( 1 9 6 3 ) , 5 5 Del. 4 8 1 , 1 8 8 A.2d D. F. Q u i l l e n & 510; S p i e g e l m a n v. Gold D u s t T e x a c o ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 9 1 Nev. 5 4 2 , 539 P.2d 1 2 1 6 ; R o r i e v. Avenue Shipping Co. 2nd 9 4 8 . (Tex.Civ.App.l967), 414 S . W . I f a p l a i n t i f f h a s a c t i v e l y resumed t h e p r o s e c u t i o n of a case, t h e p o l i c y f a v o r i n g t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f a c a s e o n i t s m e r i t s is more c o m p e l l i n g t h a n t h e p o l i c y u n d e r l y i n g R u l e 4 1 ( b ) w h i c h is t o p r e v e n t u n r e a s o n a b l e d e l a y s . W e h o l d t h a t t h e m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e to p r o s e - c u t e was u n t i m e l y i n t h i s case e v e n t h o u g h t h e d e f e n d a n t s claim t o have been a c t u a l l y p r e j u d i c e d by t h e d e l a y i n p r o s e c u t i o n due t o t h e d e a t h of d e f e n d a n t Robert P a p p i n d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d of t i m e p l a i n t i f f s were n o t a c t i v e l y p r o s e c u t i n g t h e case. W e n o t e f i r s t of a l l t h a t n e a r l y e v e r y o n e i n v o l v e d i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e P a p p i n / M a t h e r p r o j e c t i s s t i l l a v a i l a b l e to t e s t i f y , including t h e c i t y e n g i n e e r , Pappin/Matherls p r o j e c t e n g i n e e r , t h e c o n t r a c t o r ' s j o b s u p e r i n t e n d e n t , as w e l l a s M r . M a t h e r and Mrs. P a p p i n . A l s o , v a r i o u s r e c o r d s and f i l e s con- c e r n i n g t h e p r o j e c t a r e a v a i l a b l e as e v i d e n c e . Moreover, M r . P a p p i n d i e d s e v e r a l m o n t h s b e f o r e t h e p l a i n t i f f s resumed a c t i v e p r o s e c u t i o n o f t h i s c a s e , and n o o b j e c t i o n came from t h e d e f e n d a n t s u n t i l some t h r e e and o n e - h a l f months a f t e r a c t i v e prosecu- t i o n had commenced. For t h e f o r e g o i n g r e a s o n s , we r e v e r s e t h e d e c i s i o n of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t and remand t h e case f o r t r i a l . Chief J u s t i c e W concur: e

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.