M. Groo v. 11th Judicial District ( 2023 )

rnrITNAL 01/24/2023 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: OP 22-0587 OP 22-0587 FriLFO MELISSA GROO, JAN 2 4 2023 Petitioner, Bowa cr G Clortc n rcenwood Supreme C Stata of montanaourt v. ORDER MONTANA ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, HON. AMY EDDY, Presiding Respondent. Petitioner and Defendant Melissa Groo seeks a writ of supervisory control over the Eleventh Judicial District Court in Cause No. DV-22-087(A) to reverse that court's Order denying her motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Groo maintains the District Court erred in concluding it could exercise personal jurisdiction over her in this matter. On October 19, 2022, this Court requested responses to Groo's petition. The Court subsequently ordered further briefing on December 22, 2022. On January 4, 2023, this Court ordered oral argument, set to occur on March 31, 2023. Groo then requested that this Court stay the underlying litigation, as provided for by M. R. App. P. 14(7)(c). She alleges that if the District Court case is not stayed, she will be require\d to continue to defend while her petition for writ of supervisory control is considered by thil Court. She advises us that the current scheduling order in the District Court requires expert disclosures by March 3, 2023, which is prior to the oral argument set in this Court. She further asserts that the plaintiffs in the underlying matter will suffer little harm if the matter is stayed as they seek damages for Groo's alleged past actions and there are no allegations of ongoing harm. Triple D Game Farm, Inc. a/Wa Triple D Wildlife, Lorney "Jay" Deist, and Kimberly Deist, the plaintiffs in the underlying District Court case, object to Groo's motion to stay. They argue that she overstates the harm she will suffer if a stay is not granted and further argue that she should first move the District Court to modify its scheduling order before seeking relief here. However, they do not dispute that if a stay is not issued, Groo will be forced to defend in the underlying lawsuit while the question of personal jurisdiction remains at issue. M. R. App. P. 14(7)(c) provides that this Court may order a stay of further proceedings in the other court pending our resolution of a petition for supervisory control. We find it appropriate to do so here. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the proceedings in Cause No. DV-22-087(A) in the Eleventh Judicial District Court are STAYED pending this Court's decision on the Petition. The Clerk is directed to provide immediate notice of this Order to counsel for Petitioner, all counsel of record in the Eleventh Judicial District Court Cause No. DV-22-087(A), and to the Honorable Amy Eddy, presiding District Judge. DATED this ,2 zMay of January, 2023. Chief Justice 2