No. 13125
I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF M N A A
OTN
1976
STATE OF M N A A ex r e l . Department o f
OTN
H e a l t h and Environmental S c i e n c e s ,
P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t ,
CITY OF LIVINGSTON, County o f Park, S t a t e
of Montana,
Defendant and Respondent.
Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e S i x t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t ,
Honorable J a c k D. Shans trom, Judge p r e s i d i n g .
Counsel o f Record :
For Appellant :
Richard D. K l i n g e r a r g u e d , Helena, Montana
A. Michael S a l v a g n i a p p e a r e d , Helena, Montana
F o r Respondent :
R o b e r t L. J o v i c k a r g u e d , L i v i n g s t o n , Montana
Submitted : F e b r u a r y 2 , 1976
Decided : 4p)i. 1 1976
-
Filed: ij.'t -: *LJ?~
Mr. J u s t i c e Frank I . Haswell d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e C o u r t .
The S t a t e o f Montana f i l e d a c i v i l a c t i o n a g a i n s t t h e
C i t y o f L i v i n g s t o n i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , P a r k County, s e e k i n g
r e c o v e r y of a monetary p e n a l t y and a compliance o r d e r from t h e
c o u r t f o r a l l e g e d v i o l a t i o n s o f Montana's Water P o l l u t i o n A c t ,
T i t l e 69, C h a p t e r 48, R.C.M. 1947. The C i t y moved t o d i s m i s s
t h e complaint f o r f a i l u r e t o s t a t e a c l a i m . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t
g r a n t e d summary judgment i n f a v o r of t h e C i t y . The S t a t e a p p e a l s .
According t o t h e c o m p l a i n t , t h e S t a t e Department o f
H e a l t h and Environmental S c i e n c e s (Department) i s s u e d t h e C i t y
a p e r m i t on November 21, 1973, which a u t h o r i z e d a l i m i t e d d i s -
c h a r g e of l i q u i d wastes from t h e C i t y ' s sewage t r e a t m e n t p l a n t
i n t o t h e Yellowstone R i v e r . "Special conditions" of t h e permit
r e q u i r e d t h e C i t y t o immediately n o t i f y t h e Department and t h e
f e d e r a l Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency (EPA) o f any a c c i d e n t a l
o r unplanned d i s c h a r g e o r d i v e r s i o n o f wastes which would t e n d
t o v i o l a t e t h e c o n d i t i o n s of t h e p e r m i t .
The c o m p l a i n t f u r t h e r a l l e g e s t h a t on o r a b o u t September
6 , 1974, r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of t h e Department and t h e EPA o b s e r v e d
a b y p a s s o f raw sewage from t h e C i t y ' s sewage t r e a t m e n t p l a n t i n t o
t h e Yellowstone R i v e r . The C i t y d i d n o t n o t i f y t h e Department o r
t h e EPA a s r e q u i r e d by i t s p e r m i t .
The c o m p l a i n t s t a t e s t h e Department i s s u e d a compliance
o r d e r which it s e r v e d on t h e c i t y c l e r k o f L i v i n g s t o n . The com-
p l i a n c e o r d e r was i s s u e d p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 6 9 - 4 8 2 0 . 1 ( 2 ) , R.C.M.
1 9 4 7 , and o r d e r e d t h e C i t y t o submit t o t h e Department w i t h i n
f i f t e e n days an eight-point r e p o r t r e l a t i n g t o t h e cause of t h e
bypass and t h e c o r r e c t i v e and p r e v e n t i v e measures t a k e n by t h e
City. The C i t y f a i l e d t o respond t o t h e compliance o r d e r .
The c o m p l a i n t a s s e r t e d two v i o l a t i o n s o f Montana's Water
P o l l u t i o n A c t by t h e C i t y : (1) f a i l u r e t o immediately n o t i f y
t h e Department and t h e EPA o f t h e sewage b y p a s s i n v i o l a t i o n
o f s e c t i o n 6 9 - 4 8 0 6 ( 3 ) , R.C.M. 1947, and ( 2 ) f a i l u r e t o r e p l y t o
t h e D e p a r t m e n t ' s compliance o r d e r i n v i o l a t i o n o f s e c t i o n 69-
4 8 2 0 . 1 ( 2 ) , R.C.M. 1947. The c o m p l a i n t s e e k s a c i v i l p e n a l t y of
$3,000 and a c o u r t o r d e r d i r e c t i n g t h e C i t y t o m a i n t a i n f u l l
compliance w i t h a l l t e r m s and c o n d i t i o n s of i t s p e r m i t .
The C i t y f i l e d a motion t o d i s m i s s t h e c o m p l a i n t f o r
f a i l u r e t o s t a t e a c l a i m on which r e l i e f c a n be g r a n t e d . The
motion was s u b m i t t e d f o r d e c i s i o n on b r i e f s . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t
entered an order s t a t i n g i n pertinent p a r t :
" * * * it a p p e a r i n g t o t h e C o u r t t h a t t h e
Complaint f a i l s t o s t a t e a c l a i m upon which r e l i e f
c a n b e g r a n t e d and t h a t t h e r e i s no g e n u i n e i s s u e
as t o any m a t e r i a l f a c t ;
"IT I S HEREBY ORDERED t h a t Judgment be e n t e r e d i n
f a v o r o f Defendant, C i t y of L i v i n g s t o n * * *."
The S t a t e a p p e a l s .
The u l t i m a t e i s s u e on a p p e a l i s whether summary judgment
was p r o p e r l y g r a n t e d . T h i s t u r n s on two u n d e r l y i n g q u e s t i o n s :
(1) Does t h e c o m p l a i n t s t a t e a c l a i m on which r e l i e f c a n be
granted? ( 2 ) Can summary judgment be g r a n t e d on a motion t o d i s -
m i s s t h e complaint f o r f a i l u r e t o s t a t e a claim?
I n i t s f i r s t claim f o r r e l i e f , t h e S t a t e a l l e g e s t h a t
a g e n t s o f t h e Department and t h e EPA o b s e r v e d t h e b y p a s s of r a w
sewage from t h e C i t y ' s sewage t r e a t m e n t p l a n t i n t o t h e Yellowstone
R i v e r and t h a t t h e C i t y d i d n o t " i m m e d i a t e l y n o t i f y " t h e Depart-
ment and t h e EPA o f such b y p a s s a s r e q u i r e d by i t s p e r m i t . Assum-
ing t h a t these allegations a r e true, is the State e n t i t l e d t o
relief? W t h i n k n o t , and s o h o l d .
e The Department had a c t u a l
n o t i c e o f t h e bypass. Telephone o r w r i t t e n n o t i c e by t h e C i t y
under t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s would have been a u s e l e s s g e s t u r e .
S e c t i o n 49-124, R.C.M. 1947, s t a t e s :
"The law n e i t h e r d o e s nor r e q u i r e s i d l e a c t s . "
N c l a i m f o r r e l i e f on t h i s b a s i s i s s t a t e d .
o
I n i t s second c l a i m f o r r e l i e f , t h e S t a t e a l l e g e s i s s u -
a n c e of a n a p p r o p r i a t e compliance o r d e r i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h
s e c t i o n 6 9 - 4 8 2 0 . 1 ( 2 ) , R.C.M. 1947; p e r s o n a l s e r v i c e t h e r e o f on
t h e c i t y c l e r k of L i v i n g s t o n p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 6 9 - 4 8 2 0 ( 1 ) ,
R.C.M. 1947; and f a i l u r e of t h e C i t y t o r e p l y t h e r e t o w i t h i n
f i f t e e n d a y s a s r e q u i r e d by t h e compliance o r d e r .
The C i t y c o n t e n d s t h e s e r v i c e o f t h e compliance o r d e r
was d e f e c t i v e i n t h a t p e r s o n a l s e r v i c e on t h e C i t y c o u l d o n l y
be accomplished by p e r s o n a l s e r v i c e on t h e Mayor under p r i n c i p l e s
of common l a w and Rule 4 , M.R.Civ.P.
I n o u r view, t h e c o n t r o l l i n g s t a t u t e d o e s n o t r e q u i r e
s e r v i c e on t h e mayor. S e r v i c e may be made on any a g e n t o f t h e
C i t y , e i t h e r p e r s o n a l l y o r by m a i l a s s t a t e d i n s e c t i o n 6 9 - 4 8 2 0 ( 1 ) ,
R.C.M. 1947:
"When t h e d e p a r t m e n t h a s r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a t
a v i o l a t i o n of t h i s c h a p t e r o r a r u l e made under
it h a s o c c u r r e d , it may have w r i t t e n n o t i c e s e r v e d
p e r s o n a l l y o r by m a i l on t h e a l l e g e d v i o l a t o r o r
h i s aqent. The n o t i c e s h a l l s t a t e t h e p r o v i s i o n
a l l e g e d t o be v i o l a t e d , t h e f a c t s a l l e g e d t o con-
s t i t u t e t h e v i o l a t i o n , t h e n a t u r e of c o r r e c t i v e
a c t i o n which t h e d e p a r t m e n t r e q u i r e s , and t h e t i m e
w i t h i n which t h e a c t i o n i s t o be t a k e n . For t h e
p u r p o s e s o f t h i s c h a p t e r , s e r v i c e by m a i l i s com-
p l e t e on t h e d a t e o f m a i l i n g . " (Emphasis s u p p l i e d . )
The e x p r e s s p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s s p e c i a l s t a t u t e r e l a t i n g t o s e r v i c e
under t h e Montana Water P o l l u t i o n A c t c o n t r o l o v e r g e n e r a l s t a t u t e s
r e l a t i n g t o s e r v i c e of p r o c e s s i n a c i v i l a c t i o n upon a m u n i c i p a l -
i t y under Rule 4 , M.R.Civ.P., t o t h e e x t e n t o f any i n c o n s i s t e n c y .
Teamsters e t a l . v . Montana Liquor C o n t r o l Board, 155 Mont. 300,
421 P.2d 541; I n r e S t e v e n s o n ' s E s t a t e , 87 Mont. 486, 289 P. 566.
The same c a n be s a i d o f s t a t u t o r y e n a c t m e n t s v i s - a - v i s inconsistent
common law p r i n c i p l e s .
W e t h e r e f o r e h o l d t h a t s e r v i c e of t h e compliance o r d e r
on t h e C i t y was l e g a l l y made, and a c l a i m f o r r e l i e f a g a i n s t t h e
C i t y f o r v i o l a t i o n t h e r e o f was s t a t e d i n t h e c o m p l a i n t .
The second i s s u e c o n c e r n s whether e n t r y of summary
judgment i n f a v o r o f t h e C i t y was c o r r e c t . Here summary
judgment was based on t h e c o m p l a i n t a l o n e . Nothing o u t s i d e
t h e b a r e a l l e g a t i o n s of t h e c o m p l a i n t was b e f o r e t h e d i s t r i c t
court. The d i s t r i c t c o u r t t r e a t e d t h e C i t y ' s motion t o d i s m i s s
under Rule 1 2 ( b ) ( 6 ) , M.R.Civ.P., a s a motion f o r summary judg-
ment under Rule 5 6 ( c ) , M.R.Civ.P., without n o t i c e thereof t o
the State. T h i s was e r r o r .
The t r e a t m e n t of a motion t o d i s m i s s a s a motion f o r
summary judgment i s governed by Rule 1 2 ( b ) , M.R.Civ.P., which
provides i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t :
" * * * I f , on a motion a s s e r t i n g t h e d e f e n s e
numbered ( 6 ) t o d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e of t h e
p l e a d i n g t o s t a t e a c l a i m upon which r e l i e f c a n
be g r a n t e d , m a t t e r s o u t s i d e t h e p l e a d i n g s a r e
p r e s e n t e d t o and n o t excluded by t h e c o u r t , t h e
motion s h a l l be t r e a t e d a s o n e f o r summary judg-
ment and d i s p o s e d of a s p r o v i d e d i n Rule 56,
and a l l p a r t i e s s h a l l be q i v e n r e a s o n a b l e oppor-
t u n i t y t o p r e s e n t a l l m a t e r i a l made p e r t i n e n t t o
s u c h motion by Rule 56. " (Emphasis s u p p l i e d . )
Here, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t t r e a t e d t h e C i t y ' s motion t o
d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e t o s t a t e a c l a i m a s a motion f o r summary
judgment w i t h o u t n o t i c e and w i t h o u t a f f o r d i n g t h e S t a t e a r e a s o n -
a b l e o p p o r t u n i t y t o oppose it. The S t a t e was n o t " g i v e n r e a s o n -
a b l e o p p o r t u n i t y t o p r e s e n t a l l m a t e r i a l p e r t i n e n t t o s u c h motion
by Rule 56" a s r e q u i r e d by Rule 1 2 ( b ) , M.R.Civ.P. The r a t i o n a l e
s u p p o r t i n g t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t h a s been s t a t e d i n t h i s l a n g u a g e :
" A s soon a s a motion t o d i s m i s s under Rule 1 2 ( b ) ( 6 )
i s c o n v e r t e d i n t o a motion f o r summary judgment,
t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f Rule 56 become o p e r a b l e . It is
i m p o r t a n t t h a t t h e c o u r t g i v e t h e p a r t i e s n o t i c e of
t h e changed s t a t u s o f t h e motion and a ' r e a s o n a b l e
o p p o r t u n i t y t o p r e s e n t a l l m a t e r i a l made p e r t i n e n t
t o s u c h motion by Rule 5 6 . ' I n t h i s way no one w i l l
be t a k e n by s u r p r i s e by t h e c o n v e r s i o n . Once t h e
p r o c e e d i n g becomes one f o r summary judgment, t h e
moving p a r t y ' s burden changes and he i s o b l i g e d t o
d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s no g e n u i n e i s s u e a s
t o any m a t e r i a l f a c t and t h a t he i s e n t i t l e d t o a
judgment a s a m a t t e r o f l a w . " 5 Wright & Miller,
F e d e r a l P r a c t i c e & P r o c e d u r e : C i v i l § 1366, p. 683.
T h i s i d e n t i c a l r a t i o n a l e i s e x p r e s s e d i n t h e a d v i s o r y committee
n o t e s t o t h e 1 9 4 8 amendment t o F e d e r a l R u l e o f C i v i l P r o c e d u r e
1 2 ( b ) , from which Montana ' s r u l e i s modeled.
Thus it was e r r o r f o r t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o g r a n t summary
judgment t o t h e C i t y w i t h o u t a f f o r d i n g t h e S t a t e n o t i c e and a
r e a s o n a b l e o p p o r t u n i t y t o be heard.
W e v a c a t e t h e summary judgment h e r e i n and remand t h i s
c a s e t o t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t f o r f u r t h e r proceedings.
Justice
' Justices