Wittich Law Firm, P.C. v. O'Connell, 370 Mont. 103

WLF sued the O’Connells for unpaid legal fees; district court entered default judgment against them on March 9, 2011.
O’Connells failed to answer within 20 days and did not appear; WLF pursued collection efforts and debt accrued.
WLF sent multiple payment demand letters; O’Connells paid most but still owed $93.99 as of December 2010.
Default judgment included $808.80 in costs/fees and later a separate $2,860.00 award for responding to the motion to vacate.
O’Connells filed a Rule 60(b) motion nine months after judgment (Dec. 5, 2011) arguing fraud and accounting issues; court treated as 60(b)(3) and denied, then denied 60(b)(6).
On appeal, the court affirmed, and dismissed challenges to a March 20, 2012 order regarding January/February motions; concurrence discusses fee dispute policy

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court slightly abused its discretion denying vacatur of the default judgment	WLF	O’Connell	No due to limited post-judgment relief under Rule 60(b)
Whether the district court properly awarded attorney fees/costs to WLF	WLF contract allowed fees; fees reasonable	O’Connell argues not necessary; challenge to accounting	Yes; contract language authorized fees; awards upheld
Whether the district court correctly denied the O’Connells’ 59(e) and 60(b) motions seeking to alter or set aside the denial of vacating the default judgment	WLF	O’Connell	Appeal of March 20, 2012 order dismissed; trial court’s denial affirmed

Green v. Gerber, 2013 MT 35 (Mont. 2013) (60(b) relief not available when other grounds apply; need extraordinary circumstances)
In re Marriage of Hopper, 1999 MT 310 (Mont. 1999) (Rule 60(b)6 only after others; extraordinary circumstances required)
Waters, 223 Mont. 183 (Mont. 1986) (requirement to show none of Rule 60(b)(1)-(5) apply before 60(b)(6))
Essex Ins. Co. v. Moose's Saloon, Inc., 2007 MT 202 (Mont. 2007) (abuse of discretion standard for Rule 60(b) rulings)