In Re the Marriage of Sampley, 347 P.3d 1281

Matthew and Michelle Sampley married in 2010; their son Cael was born in Alaska in 2011. The family moved several times and lived briefly in Billings, Montana, in late September 2013.
Michelle and Cael traveled to British Columbia in October 2013 and extended their stay; Matthew visited them there in November and December 2013.
Michelle returned to Billings in February 2014 to retrieve belongings and then returned to Canada with Cael; she informed Matthew in February she would not return to Billings with Cael.
Matthew filed for dissolution in Yellowstone County (May 29, 2014) and sought custody/parenting determinations; Michelle moved to dismiss custody/parenting claims for lack of jurisdiction under the UCCJEA.
The District Court granted Michelle’s Rule 12(b)(1) motion, finding Montana was not Cael’s “home state” under § 40-7-103(7), MCA, and dismissed custody matters for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Matthew appealed, raising (1) denial of an oral hearing and (2) that Cael had “lived in” Montana for six months when temporary absences are counted.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court erred by deciding the Rule 12(b)(1) motion without an oral hearing	Sampley: court was required to hold a hearing (per M. R. Civ. P. 12(i)) and denial violated due process	Sampley’s request not mandatory; court may resolve jurisdictional motions on affidavits/filings when no material facts are disputed	No error: court acted within its discretion to decide on filings; no due-process violation because court made no custody determination and did not deprive Sampley of a liberty interest
Whether Montana was the child’s “home state” under the UCCJEA (i.e., Cael “lived in” Montana six months, including temporary absences)	Sampley: "lived in" includes temporary absences, so counting temporary absence time yields six months	Messex: absence was not temporary; Montana cannot be home state; also contested on appeal as beyond district court analysis	Held that "temporary absence" is included in "lived in" but on the totality-of-circumstances test Cael’s absence ceased to be temporary by Feb 2014; Cael lived in Montana at most five months, so Montana lacked jurisdiction

General Constructors, Inc. v. Chewculator, Inc., 21 P.3d 604 (Mont. 2001) (district court may resolve subject-matter jurisdiction motions on pleadings/affidavits without a hearing when no material facts are disputed)
Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (parental care and custody is a constitutionally protected liberty interest)
Baltrusch v. Baltrusch, 130 P.3d 1267 (Mont. 2006) (preclusive effect requires opportunity to litigate the claim)
In re Myrland, 248 P.3d 290 (Mont. 2010) (statutory interpretation and application reviewed for correctness)