Summary 2005 WY 161

Summary of Decision issued December 21, 2005

[SPECIAL NOTE: These opinions use the "Universal Citation." They were given "official" citations when they were issued. You should use these citations whenever you cite these opinions, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinions that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Montoya v. Montoya

Citation: 2005 WY 161

Docket Number: 05-65

Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County, Honorable Edward Grant, Judge

Representing Appellant (Defendant): Carol K. Watson, of Phelan Law Offices, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee (Plaintiff): Jakob Z. Norman, of Williams, Porter, Day & Neville, PC, Casper, Wyoming.

Date of Decision: December 21, 2005

Issues: Whether the Court should refuse to consider Appellant’s contentions because he failed to provide a statement of issues pursuant to W.R.A.P. 7.01(d). Whether the appeal should be dismissed because Appellant failed to provide a settled and approved statement of the evidence in violation of W.R.A.P. 3.03. Whether the district court abused its discretion in its disposition of marital assets. Whether reasonable attorney’s fees should be assessed against Appellant pursuant to W.R.A.P. 10.05.

Holdings: The district court’s disposition of marital property is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. Despite Appellant’s failure to provide the required statement of issues, it was obvious to the Court that his sole claim of error concerned the distribution of the marital property. The Court determined that Appellee had adequate notice of the issue and so declined to dismiss for failure to comply with W.R.A.P. 7.01(d). Appellant failed to provide a transcript of the proceedings or a statement of the evidence pursuant to W.R.A.P. 3.03 so that a proper evaluation of the trial court’s decision could be conducted. Appellant urged the Court to adopt “[a] change in the law, providing that when a judge has a hearing resulting in a Decree of Divorce for the parties, he must supply either a Statement of Facts or a Decision Letter.” The Court did not consider the argument because Appellant did not supply cogent argument or pertinent legal authority. Absent the transcript or statement of the evidence, the Court presumed the district court had reasonable evidentiary basis for its decision. Based upon the record, the Court did not find an abuse of discretion by the district court.
The Court certified there was no reasonable cause for appeal. Therefore sanctions were available. Appellee’s counsel was requested to submit a statement of costs and attorney’s fees to the Court for review. After review, an order will be entered for an appropriate award of costs and fees to Appellee.

The decision of the district court was affirmed.

J. Burke delivered the opinion for the court.

Link to the case: http://tinyurl.com/anjey .