Opinion
DA 21-0367
03-01-2022
MATTHEW RYAN AILER, Defendant and Appellant, v. STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Appellee.
ORDER
Before this Court are self-represented Appellant Matthew Ryan Ailer's Petition for Rehearing of a January 11, 2022 Order and three motions. Ailer contends that our decision overlooked some fact material to the decision, pursuant to M. R. App. P. 20(1)(a)(i). His motions are titled: (1) Motion for the State to Provide this Court as to Who Altered Medical Records and Medical Status Forms, Specifically as to Who Changed the Uncontested First Claim Number to the Contested Second Claim Number on Medical Records and Medical Status Forms without the Permission of Any Medical Provider or the Patient Matthew Which is Cited in the District Court Record; (2) Motion for the State to Provide This Court with the 154 Pieces of Brady Evidence which is Cited in the District Court Record; and (3) Motion for Summary Judgment. Ailer provides that his motions are opposed by the State. M. R. App. P. 16(1).
M. R. App. P. 20(1)(a) provides criteria for rehearing. This Court “will consider a petition for rehearing presented only upon . .. [t]hat it overlooked some fact material to the decision[]" M. R. App. P. 20(1)(a)(i). "Absent clearly demonstrated exceptional circumstances, the supreme court will not grant petitions for rehearing of its orders disposing of motions or petitions for extraordinary writs," M. R. App. P. 20(1)(d).
In this Court's prior Order, we denied Ailer s Motions for In-Camera Review and for Leave to File an Over-Length Motion for In-Camera Review because, as stated then, "[t]hese motions are not well taken." Ailer v. State, No. DA 21-0367, Order at 1 (Mont. Jan. 11, 2022). We explained that:
Ailer seeks to have this Court conduct an in-camera review of Confidential Criminal Justice Information (CC7I) for his criminal investigation, related to a-claim in Workers' Compensation Court (WCC) and subsequent criminal investigation for theft, dating back to 2011. The State responds that this motion should be denied for five reasons, including that an in-camera review occurs at the District Court level and this Court has denied his motion to supplement the record in an October 12, 2021 Order.Ailer v. State, No. DA 21-0367, Order at 1 (Mont. Jan. 11, 2022).
Ailer again attempts to bring in other documents and materials from cases which are not on appeal. Twice before, we have denied his motions to expand the record. See Ailer v. State, No. DA 21-0367, Order denying Motion to Supplement (Mont. Oct. 26, 2021) and Ailer v. State, No. DA 21-0367, Order denying Motion for In-Camera Review (Mont. Jan. 11, 2022). We have explained to him that the record on appeal is narrowly defined, pursuant to M. R. App. P. 8(1). He has not demonstrated that rehearing is warranted because he cannot show that we overlooked some fact material to the decision nor extraordinary circumstances.
We further conclude that his instant motions are improper. Summary judgment is the province of the district court, pursuant to the Montana Rules of Civil Procedure. M. R. Civ. P. 1 and 56. The District Court record on appeal here has thirteen items. Ailer is precluded from bringing documents from a different court's record. His other two motions have no bearing in this appeal of a July 1, 2021 Missoula County District Court Order denying his motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Ailer's Petition for Rehearing is DENIED and DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Ailer's Motion for the State to Provide this Court as to Who Altered Medical Records and Medical Status Forms, Specifically as to Who Changed the Uncontested First Claim Number to the Contested Second Claim Number on Medical Records and Medical Status Forms without the Permission of Any Medical Provider or the Patient Matthew Which is Cited in the District Court Record; Motion for the State to Provide This Court with the 154 Pieces of Brady Evidence which is Cited in the District Court Record; and Motion for Summary Judgment are all DISMISSED.
The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to Matthew Ryan Ailer personally.