Legal Opinion

Hanley v. Lanier

Montana Supreme Court

Decided May 23, 2001No. 01-305PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

¶1 The respondents, Keith and Sue Lanier (Laniers) have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal in this matter, for the purported failure of third party defendant and appellant Joanne R. Jacobsen (Jacobsen), to comply with the mediation requirements of Rule 54, M.R.App.P. In Jacobsen’s notice of appeal, she certified that the appeal was not subject to the mediation process required by Rule 54, M.R.App.P. Laniers contend otherwise, stating that the cause of action appealed from is one in which monetary damages were sought, and that hence, Rule 54, M.R.App.P., subjects the appeal…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dobrocke v. City of Columbia FallsMontana Supreme Court · 2000
  2. McDonald v. CosmanMontana Supreme Court · 1999
  3. In Re the Emancipation of DammarellMontana Supreme Court · 2000

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Guang Xiang Liang v. LaiMontana Supreme Court · 2003

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API