STATE OF MONTANA ex rel. JOSEPH W. TAYLOR, Petitioner,
MAGDALENA C. BOWEN, Standing Master, and THE HON. RIENNE McELYEA, District Judge Eighteenth Judicial District Court, Gallatin County, Respondents.
January 16, 2018, Petitioner Joseph W, Taylor
("Joseph"), through counsel, filed with this Court
a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari or, in the alternative, a
Writ of Supervisory Control, regarding a contempt citation
issued on July 6, 2017, by the Eighteenth Judicial District
Standing Master, Magdalena C, Bowen, in Cause No. DR-12-126B,
In Re the Marriage of Lisa Taylor and Joseph Taylor.
On January 23, 2018, we ordered the Eighteenth Judicial
District Court and/or Lisa Taylor ("Lisa") to
respond to Joseph's Petition. Both the Eighteenth
Judicial District and Lisa have responded.
Court has identified three 'indispensable' requisites
to the granting of the writ of certiorari that 'must
co-exist': (1) excess of jurisdiction; (2) absence of the
right to appeal; and (3) lack of a plain, speedy and adequate
remedy other than certiorari." Lee v. Lee, 2000
MT 67, ¶ 23, 299 Mont. 78, 996 P.2d 389. Supervisory
control is an extraordinary remedy that is sometimes
justified when (1) urgency or emergency factors exist making
the normal appeal process inadequate, (2) the case involves
purely legal questions, and (3) in a civil case, either the
other court is proceeding under a mistake of law causing a
gross injustice, or constitutional issues of state-wide
importance are involved. M. R. App. P. 14(3).
fails to even acknowledge, much less substantively address,
the mandatory requirements for issuance of either a writ of
certiorari or a writ of supervisory control, "Parties
must present a reasoned argument to advance their positions,
supported by citations to appropriate authority. M. R. App.
P. 12(1)(t). When a party fails to do so, our caselaw is
well-settled. We will not consider unsupported issues or
arguments." Griffith v. Butte Sch. Dist No. 7,
2010 MT 246, ¶ 42, 358 Mont. 193, 244 P.3d 321, citing
In re Marriage of McMahon, 2002 MT 198, P 6, 311
Mont. 175, 53 P.3d 1266. "It is not this Court's job
to conduct legal research on [a party's] behalf, to guess
as to [a party's] precise position, or to develop legal
analysis that may lend support to that position."
Johansen v. Dept. of Nat. Resources &
Conservation, 1998 MT 51, ¶ 24, 288 Mont. 39, 955
P.2d 653 (citations omitted).
Standing Master's contempt citation was issued on July 6,
2017. It held that Joseph had violated a previous order of
the Court by failing to pay child support; failing to provide
health insurance; failing to pay past spousal support as
ordered; failing to pay past attorney fees; failing to revise
2012 tax returns and pay tax liabilities; and failing to make
monthly bankruptcy payments to Lisa. The citation ordered,
among other things, that Lisa shall have a judgment against
Joseph in the amount of $75, 234.56; that Joseph's income
is subject to immediate income withholding under §
40-5-303, MCA; and that Joseph shall serve 6 days in the
county jail. Section 3-5-126(2), MCA, provides:
Within 10 days after being served with notice of the filing
of the findings and conclusions or order, any party may serve
written specific objections upon the other parties or may
apply to the court for an extension to serve. Application to
the court for action upon the findings and conclusions or
order and upon the filing of specific objections to the
findings and conclusions or order must be by motion and upon
notice as prescribed in Rule 6(c) of the Montana Rules of
Civil Procedure. The court, after a hearing, may adopt the
findings and conclusions or order and may modify, reject in
whole or in part, receive further evidence, or recommit the
findings and conclusions or order with instructions.
the contempt citation was issued, Joseph took no action for
over six months, until he petitioned this Court for a writ on
January 16, 2018. As the District Court correctly points out
in its response, had Joseph followed proper procedures, he
could have appealed the contempt order. Section 3-1-523(2),
has failed to establish that he lacked either the right to
appeal, or a plain, speedy and adequate remedy other than
certiorari. Thus, he is not entitled to a writ of certiorari.
Similarly, Joseph has failed to establish that urgency or
emergency factors exist making the normal appeal process
inadequate. Thus, he has failed to establish that he is
entitled to the extraordinary remedy of supervisory control.
IT IS ORDERED that the petition for a writ of certiorari or,
in the alternative, a writ of supervisory control is DENIED
Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to counsel
for Petitioner Joseph W. Taylor, counsel for Lisa Taylor,
Standing Master Magdalena C. Bowen, and the ...