Embleton v. Larson

2025 MT 292N

• Court: Montana Supreme Court
• Decided: December 16, 2025
• Docket: DA 25-0163
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

12/16/2025

DA 25-0163 Case Number: DA 25-0163

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

2025 MT 292N

MARY K. EMBLETON,

Petitioner and Appellant,

v.

JAMES L. LARSON and JOE BRIGGS, in their official capacities as CASCADE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; and CASCADE COUNTY, a Political Subdivision of the State of Montana,

Respondents and Appellees.

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eighth Judicial District, In and For the County of Cascade, Cause No. BDV-24-0548 Honorable Elizabeth A. Best, Presiding Judge

COUNSEL OF RECORD:

For Appellant:

Mary K. Embleton, Self-Represented, Sand Coulee, Montana

For Appellees:

Elizabeth W. Lund, Boone Karlberg P.C., Missoula, Montana

Submitted on Briefs: December 3, 2025

Decided: December 16, 2025

Filed:

__________________________________________ Clerk Justice Laurie McKinnon delivered the Opinion of the Court.

¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating

Rules, this case is decided by memorandum opinion and shall not be cited and does not

serve as precedent. Its case title, 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 Petitioner and Appellant Mary K. Embleton (Embleton) filed a petition for

injunctive relief against Cascade County (County) in the Eighth Judicial District Court,

Cascade County. Embleton is apparently aggrieved by an alleged $54.00 increase in her

solid waste district assessments. She requested an expedited hearing on her claims. After

full briefing, the District Court denied her request without a hearing, determined that her

claims were not meritorious, and dismissed and closed the case.

¶3 The County, while averring that the court was correct on the merits, represents that

the issuance by the District Court of a final judgment dismissing the case without a hearing

was premature. The County requests that this matter be remanded, pursuant to Davis v.

Westphal, 2017 MT 276, 389 Mont. 251, 405 P.3d 73, for a hearing.

¶4 Based on the County’s concession, the District Court’s judgment dismissing

Embleton’s claims is reversed. This matter is remanded for the District Court to conduct

a hearing.

¶5 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c) of our

Internal Operating Rules, which provides for memorandum opinions. In the opinion of the

2 Court, the case presents a question controlled by settled law or by the clear application of

applicable standards of review.

¶6 Reversed and remanded.

/S/ LAURIE McKINNON

We Concur:

/S/ CORY J. SWANSON /S/ JAMES JEREMIAH SHEA /S/ BETH BAKER /S/ INGRID GUSTAFSON