No. 80-108
I N THE SURPEME COURT OF THE STATE O MONTANA
F
1980
STATE O MONTANA, e x r e l . ,
F
EARLENE THREE IRONS,
P e t i t i o n e r and R e s p o n d e n t ,
-vs-
DEAN CURTIS THREE IRONS,
Respondent and A p p e l l a n t .
Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e T h i r t e e n t h 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 B i g Horn, The H o n o r a b l e
Diane G. B a r z , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g .
Counsel o f Record:
For Appellant:
D. M i c h a e l E a k i n , Montana L e g a l S e r v i c e s , a r g u e d ,
H a r d i n , Montana
S t e v e Bunch a r g u e d , Montana L e g a l S e r v i c e s , H e l e n a ,
Montana
F o r Respondent:
Hon. Mike G r e e l y , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , Montana
James S e y k o r a , County A t t o r n e y , H a r d i n , Montana
D e i r d r a Boggs a r g u e d , M i s s o u l a , Montana
F o r Amicus C u r i a e :
M i c h a e l G. G a r r i t y , Dept. o f Revenue, H e l e n a , Montana
Lynaugh, F i t z g e r a l d , S c h o p p e r t & S k a g g s , B i l l i n g s ,
Montana
Submitted: September 1 5 , 1 9 8 0
Decided : 13 1%;
Mr. J u s t i c e Daniel J. Shea d e l i v e r e d the Opinion of the
Court.
T h i s is an a p p e a l from a n o r d e r e n t e r e d by t h e B i g Horn
District Court under Montana's Uniform Reciprocal
E n f o r c e m e n t o f S u p p o r t A c t , s e c t i o n 40-5-101, e t seq., MCA,
directing the appellant, Dean C u r t i s s T h r e e I r o n s t o make
c h i l d s u p p o r t payments. Because t h e D i s t r i c t Court d i d n o t
have personal jurisdiction over Three Irons or subject
m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e t r a n s a c t i o n , we r e v e r s e .
Dean C u r t i s s T h r e e I r o n s i s a n e n r o l l e d member o f t h e
Crow I n d i a n T r i b e and l i v e s on t h e Crow R e s e r v a t i o n . H e is
married to but separated from Earlene Three Irons, a
S h o s h o n e I n d i a n from t h e Wind R i v e r Indian Reservation in
Wyoming. They h a v e two c h i l d r e n , Tanya J . and Dean, Jr.
The T h r e e I r o n s w e r e m a r r i e d S e p t e m b e r 1 6 , 1 9 7 4 , i n D e n v e r ,
Colorado. D u r i n g t h e i r m a r r i a g e , t h e y r e s i d e d t h e r e and on
t h e Crow R e s e r v a t i o n . Earlene Three I r o n s has resided in
Denver with the children since her separation from her
h u s b a n d i n 1975.
I n November 1 9 7 5 , w h i l e a r e s i d e n t o f C o l o r a d o , E a r l e n e
Three I r o n s f i l e d a p e t i t i o n under Colorado's URESA which
was f o r w a r d e d t o Montana f o r e n f o r c e m e n t p r o c e e d i n g s . The
Big Horn County District Court issued an order to show
cause. Dean T h r e e I r o n s was s e r v e d w i t h c o p i e s o f t h e o r d e r
and t h e p e t i t i o n w i t h i n t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e Crow I n d i a n
Reservation. Appearing specially through counsel, Three
Irons moved the District Court to dismiss for lack of
p e r s o n a l and s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n . The l o w e r c o u r t
denied the motion and ordered Three Irons to pay child
support.
On appeal, t h e primary issues a r e whether the state
c o u r t h a s p e r s o n a l and s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n . These
issues are dispositive of the appeal and we need not
consider t h e o t h e r i s s u e s presented f o r review.
T h i s a p p e a l i s g o v e r n e d by o u r h o l d i n g i n S t a t e ex r e l .
Flammond v . Flammond (No. 80-12, D e c i d e d December I?, 1 9 8 0 ) .
A l l of t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s o f f - r e s e r v a t i o n contacts are with the
S t a t e of Colorado. None a r e w i t h Montana. A s i n Flammond,
supra, the state court had neither subject matter
jurisdiction over the transaction nor --
in - -
personam
j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e husband.
Under the circumstances, t h e o n l y remedy open t o t h e
wife is to bring an appropriate enforcement of support
proceeding i n t r i b a l court. A l t h o u g h t h e Crow T r i b e h a s n o t
adopted URESA, i t s law and o r d e r code provides alternate
remedies.
The order of the District Court is vacated and the
c a u s e i s d i s m i s s e d f o r l a c k o f p e r s o n a l and s u b j e c t m a t t e r
jurisdiction.
W e Concur:
....................... -
- -
\
C w f Justice
Justices %-
Mr. Justice John Conway Harrison dissenting:
I dissent. See my dissent in State ex rel. Flammond
v. Flammond (1980), Mont. f - P. 2d
(No. 80-12, decided December 19r 1980).