MATTER OF VERMANDEL

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 03-335 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2003 MT 257N IN RE THE MATTER OF JULIA J. VERMANDEL, Deceased. APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District, In and for the County of Yellowstone, Cause No. DV 03-0013 The Honorable Gregory R. Todd, Judge presiding. COUNSEL OF RECORD: For Appellant: Irene S. Atraqchi, Pro Se, Washington, D.C. For Respondent: Duncan A. Peete, Vicki L. McDonald; Moulton, Bellingham, Longo & Mather, Billings, Montana Submitted on Briefs: August 21, 2003 Decided: September 23, 2003 Filed: __________________________________________ Clerk Chief Justice Karla M. Gray delivered the Opinion of the Court. ¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(d), Montana Supreme Court 1996 Internal Operating Rules, the following decision shall not be cited as precedent. It shall be filed as a public document with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and shall be reported by case title, Supreme Court cause number and result to the State Reporter Publishing Company and to West Group in the quarterly table of noncitable cases issued by this Court. ¶2 The Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, dismissed Irene Atraqchi's "Petition" in this matter on the basis that Atraqchi failed to comply with Rule 4C, M.R.Civ.P. Atraqchi appeals. We affirm. ¶3 The issue is whether the District Court erred in dismissing Atraqchi's "Petition" for insufficiency of process. ¶4 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to our Order dated February 11, 2003, amending Section 1.3 of our 1996 Internal Operating Rules and providing for memorandum opinions. The issue is clearly controlled by settled Montana law. ¶5 An appellant must support her argument with citations to the authorities, statutes and pages of the record relied on. Rule 23(a)(4), M.R.App.P. Failure to comply with Rule 23(a)(4), M.R.App.P., is fatal to an appeal. State v. Blackcrow, 1999 MT 44, ¶ 33, 293 Mont. 374, ¶ 33, 975 P.2d 1253, ¶ 33. Atraqchi has provided no authority for her argument that mailing a copy of her "Petition" to the defendant's attorney--without issuance or service of a summons--was proper service under the Montana Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 4C(1), M.R.Civ.P., requires that the plaintiff "shall present a summons to the clerk for issuance" 2 and Rule 4D(2), M.R.Civ.P., requires that "[t]he summons and complaint shall be served together." [Emphasis supplied.] ¶6 Affirmed. /S/ KARLA M. GRAY We concur: /S/ JOHN WARNER /S/ PATRICIA COTTER /S/ JAMES C. NELSON /S/ JIM RICE 3

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.