09/15/2020 s.kniiitd IN THE T OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: OP 20-0428

OP 20-0428 FILED ANTHONY BIRBILIS, SEP 1 5 2029 Petitioner, Bowen Greenwood Cferk of Supreme Court 'Stafc4 nf Kfic,nta v. ORDER THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, THE HONORABLE JESSICA T. FEHR, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondent.

Petitioner Anthony Birbilis seeks a writ of supervisory control directing the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, to reverse its Order denying Birbilis's motion to dismiss in its Cause No. DV 15-0391. In that Order, among other rulings in the matter,the District Court rejected Birbilis's arguments that the counts against him in the underlying litigation should be dismissed under M. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) or 12(b)(6).

Supervisory control is an extraordinary remedy that is sometimes justified when urgency or emergency factors exist making the normal appeal process inadequate, when the case involves purely legal questions, and when the other court is proceeding under a mistake of law and is causing a gross injustice, constitutional issues of state-wide importance are involved, or, in a criminal case, the other court has granted or denied a motion to substitute a judge. M. R. App. P. 14(3). Whether supervisory control is appropriate is a case-by-case decision. Stokes v. Mont. Thirteenth Judicial Dist. Court, 2011 MT 182,¶ 5, 361 Mont. 279,259 P.3d 754 (citations omitted). Consistent with Rule 14(3), it is the Court's practice to refrain from exercising supervisory control when the petitioner has an adequate remedy of appeal. E.g., Buckles v. Seventh Judicial Dist. Court, No. OP 16-0517, 386 Mont. 393, 386 P.3d 545 (table) (Oct. 18, 2016); Lichte v. Mont. Eighteenth Judicial Dist. Court, No. OP 16-0482, 385 Mont. 540. 382 P.3d 868 (table)(Aug. 24, 2016).

Here, Birbilis asserts that the District Court is operating under an error of law and that the issue is purely one of law is causing a gross injustice. Birbilis further alleges that the matter presents a constitutional issue because the court's ruling affects his due process rights, and he asserts, without further explanation, that the matter is one of state-wide importance. However, as set forth above, a party must also demonstrate that the normal appeal process is inadequate for this Court to grant a writ. Although Birbilis recites Rule 14(3), he offers no argument as to why the normal appeal process would be inadequate in this case. He has therefore not met the criteria for this Court to assume supervisory control.

Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for writ of supervisory control is DENIED and DISMISSED.

The Clerk is directed to provide immediate notice of this Order to counsel for Petitioner, all counsel of record in the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, Cause No. DV 15-0391, and the Honorable Jessica T. Fehr, presiding Judge.

DATED this Alay of September, 2020.

Chief Justice

Justices