Southwest v. 19th Judicial Dist.

Opinion

WIGINtti 05/21/2024

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: OP 24-0061

OP 24-0061

MAY 2 1 2024 C3teenwood SOUTHWEST DISTRIBUTING CO., Bowen Supreme Court Ci.,,rfc of tv:ontorla d/b/a SWD URETHANE, Stu- ta ot

Petitioner,

v. ORDER MONTANA NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, LINCOLN COUNTY, HON. MATTHEW J. CUFFE, Presiding Judge,

Respondent.

Petitioner Southwest Distributing Co., d/b/a SWD Urethane (Southwest) seeks a writ of supervisory control over the Montana Nineteenth Judicial District Court in Cause No. DV-22-72 to reverse that court's November 21, 2023 Opinion and Order Re: Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction that denied Southwest's motion to dismiss. Southwest maintains the District Court erred in concluding it could exercise personal jurisdiction over Southwest pursuant to M. R. Civ. P. 4(b)(1). On February 8, 2024, this Court requested responses to Southwest's petition. The Court subsequently requested that Southwest file a reply brief and Southwest did so on May 8, 2024. After this Court requested a reply brief, Southwest requested that this Court stay the underlying litigation, as provided for by M. R. App. P. 14(7)(c). Southwest alleges that if the District Court case is not stayed, it will be required to continue to defend while its petition for writ of supervisory control is considered by this Court. Southwest advises us that, since the District Court issued the order at issue, Southwest has responded to three sets of written discovery requests and that it anticipates more discovery requests on it are forthcoming. Deposition requests for current and former Southwest employees are pending, and various deadlines are approaching under the District Court's scheduling order, the soonest being Southwest's expert disclosure, which is due on July 31, 2024. Southwest argues that a stay is warranted because it will be relieved of its costly discovery efforts and pre-trial preparation if this Court reverses the District Court's order denying Southwest's motion to dismiss. North Idaho Insulation ("NII"), the third-party plaintiff in the underlying District Court case, objects to Southwest's motion to stay. NII argues that Southwest's discovery burdens will remain the same regardless of the outcome of this petition because Southwest is the sole source of highly relevant information and the parties will seek that information via subpoenas if Southwest is ultimately dismissed from this case. NII further asserts that Donald Fleming, the plaintiff in the underlying case, has a rnotion to amend the scheduling deadline pending in the District Court which, if granted, will reset Southwest's expert deadline to November 29, 2024. Although Fleming's pending motion, if granted, will extend Southwest's expert deadline, we are cognizant that, if a stay is not issued, Southwest 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-22-72 in the Nineteenth 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 ofrecord in the Nineteenth Judicial District Court Cause No. DV-22-72, and to the Honorable Matthew J. Cuffe, presiding District Judge. DATED this "LI, day of May, 2024.

izei);,#)9 Chief Justice

2 _ i ,_,/,...