ASPEN TRAILS RANCH, LLC v. Simmons

¶74 I dissent. In my view, the District Court erred in granting Aspen Trail’s post-judgment motion to intervene under M. R. Civ. P. 24.

¶75 Although there is nothing in Rule 24 that precludes post-judgment intervention, such motions are not favored. In re C.C.L.B., 2001 MT 66, ¶ 24, 305 Mont. 22, 30, 22 P.3d 646, 651. “[Tjhere is ‘considerable reluctance on the part of courts to allow intervention after the action has gone to judgment and a strong showing will be required of the applicant. Motions for intervention after judgment ordinarily fail to meet this exacting standard and are denied.’”…