 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Jacobsen v. State4/28/1999
nd time involved in the ordinary appeal process, as well as reduce this Court's caseload. To accomplish these goals the new provisions were designed to be, and are, self-executing. Otherwise, the caseload of the Court will not decrease, but may very well increase as the Court considers and rules upon motions which address the mediation process, such as motions to opt out of the mediation requirements, motions for substitution of mediators, extensions of time to file statements of position, and the myriad of other forms of relief that counsel may seek. Correspondingly, the parties will incur additional expense on appeal during this process. The result will be self-defeating and thwart the goals of the appellate mediation program. Consequently, this Court will not insert itself in the process except under unusual or extraordinary circumstances." Harwood v. Glacier Elec. Co-op., Inc. (1997), 282 Mont. 38, 39, 939 P.2d 981, 981-82. Jacobsen does not present the type of unusual or extraordinary circumstances which require us to intervene.
. In Conclusion, we affirm the District Court's summary judgment in favor of all the respondents, as well as the appellate mediator's requirement that Jacobsen pay his share of the mediation expenses.
JIM REGNIER
We Concur: J. A. TURNAGE TERRY N. TRIEWEILER WILLIAM E. HUNT, SR. KARLA M. GRAY
|