April 14 2009
DA 08-0100
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
2009 MT 133N
FIONA L. SHAFFER,
Petitioner and Appellee,
v.
CHESTER SHAFFER,
Respondent and Appellant.
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Fourth Judicial District,
In and For the County of Missoula, Cause No. DV-07-1684
Honorable John W. Larson, Presiding Judge
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
Chester Shaffer, (self-represented litigant); Victor, Montana
For Appellee:
Fiona L. Shaffer, (self-represented litigant); Missoula, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: April 1, 2009
Decided: April 14, 2009
Filed:
__________________________________________
Clerk
Justice Brian Morris delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(d)(v), Montana Supreme Court 1996 Internal
Operating Rules, as amended in 2003, the following memorandum decision shall not be cited
as precedent. It shall be filed as a public document with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and
its case title, Supreme Court cause number, and disposition shall be included in this Court’s
quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana Reports.
¶2 Self-represented appellant Chester Shaffer (Chester), appeals the District Court’s
order granting a permanent order of protection to his wife, Fiona L. Shaffer (Fiona). We
affirm.
¶3 Fiona filed a petition for a temporary order of protection and a hearing in Justice
Court in Missoula County on November 9, 2006. Fiona alleged that Chester had attacked
her after a dispute in their home.
¶4 The Justice Court issued a temporary order of protection and set a hearing for
November 28, 2006. A Missoula County sheriff’s deputy personally served Chester with the
order. The Justice Court held a hearing on November 28, 2006. The Justice Court extended
the order of protection for a period of one year at the conclusion of the hearing. The court’s
order applied to Fiona and her nine children. The court eventually amended the order, upon
Fiona’s motion, to exclude the nine children from the order’s scope. Chester appealed to the
District Court.
¶5 The District Court eventually held a hearing on January 14, 2008. Fiona appeared at
the hearing with counsel and Chester appeared without counsel. The parties presented
2
witnesses and cross-examined the witnesses of the other party. The District Court issued an
order on January 16, 2008, denying Chester’s appeal. The court determined that the order of
protection should remain in effect and be made permanent. Chester appeals.
¶6 Chester argues on appeal that the evidence presented at the hearing did not support the
court’s order. He also takes issue with what he claims to be numerous evidentiary and
procedural defects. Fiona did not file a brief on appeal.
¶7 We refuse to overturn the district court's decision to continue, amend, or make
permanent an order of protection absent an abuse of the court's discretion. Edelen v.
Bonamarte, 2007 MT 138, ¶ 6, 337 Mont. 407, 162 P.3d 847. We have determined to decide
this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(d) of our 1996 Internal Operating Rules, as
amended in 2003, that provide for memorandum opinions. It is manifest on the face of the
briefs and record before us that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in making
permanent the order of protection.
¶8 Affirmed.
/S/ BRIAN MORRIS
We Concur:
/S/ MIKE McGRATH
/S/ JAMES C. NELSON
/S/ W. WILLIAM LEAPHART
/S/ PATRICIA COTTER
/S/ JIM RICE
3