Patricia O'Brien Cotter

Phillip Boude sued his employer Union Pacific Railroad under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, claiming he suffered a neck injury in a July 2006 collision during a pusher/helper train maneuver caused by the railroad’s negligence. After a jury trial, the District Court entered judgment for Union Pacific. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of Boude’s termination for late injury reporting and the Public Law Board’s affirmance of that termination. The Court concluded this evidence was unfairly prejudicial and not relevant to the central issues of negligence and causation in the FELA claim. A dissent would have affirmed on the ground that any error was harmless given the weight of other evidence.

labor & employmenttorts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a wage claim by Oliver Arlington, a log truck driver employed by Miller’s Trucking, Inc., who sought unpaid regular and overtime wages based on an alleged oral employment agreement for $60,000–$70,000 annually. The Montana Department of Labor and Industry dismissed the claim, finding Arlington exempt from overtime under federal regulations because his work affected the safety of interstate commerce, and the district court affirmed that decision while denying additional evidence. The Montana Supreme Court reversed, holding that the interstate commerce exemption did not apply because Arlington’s transports occurred entirely within Montana with no fixed intent by Miller’s at the time of shipment to move the logs or byproducts across state lines. The court remanded for further proceedings to determine whether an oral agreement existed and to calculate any overtime owed.

labor & employmentbusiness & regulatory

In this case, Kevin Kichnet sued Butte-Silver Bow County and the State of Montana after being arrested and held for two months on deliberate homicide charges related to the death of his three-year-old niece, whose injuries were initially attributed to blunt force trauma while in his care; charges were later dropped when evidence showed she had been run over by a school bus. Kichnet alleged negligent investigation by county officers and negligence by the state medical examiner in classifying the death as a homicide. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for the defendants, holding that officers reasonably focused on Kichnet given the violent injuries, his inconsistent explanations, and the absence of other suspects at the time, and that his detention was lawful because it was based on a judicial finding of probable cause.

criminal lawtorts & liability

The case concerned a wrongful death lawsuit brought by Judith Newman, as personal representative of her daughter Karlye's estate, against Robert Lichfield and WWASP after Karlye died by suicide while enrolled at a Montana boarding school for troubled teens operated by entities linked to the defendants. Newman alleged negligence, deceit, and negligent misrepresentation, and appealed district court rulings that limited evidence of foreseeability, denied partial summary judgment on joint tortious conduct, and excluded historical evidence about the defendants' programs. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of summary judgment and the exclusion of certain historical evidence but reversed the limitation on foreseeability evidence, holding that the district court had improperly restricted relevant proof of the defendants' knowledge and duties, and therefore remanded for a new trial.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involves the dissolution of the marriage between Kevin and June Funk, focusing on the distribution of marital assets under Montana law. June filed for divorce in 2009 after a 19-year marriage; Kevin had inherited lakefront and other real property, vehicles, and cash in 1996. The district court included portions of the inherited property in the marital estate, awarding June half the value of the lakefront parcel and one-third of the appreciated value of the other land, along with a jointly titled vehicle and maintenance. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's award of the 2005 Toyota Sienna and the valuation of the lakefront property but remanded for further findings. The core reasoning was that Mont. Code Ann. § 40-4-202 requires courts to equitably apportion all property of either spouse, regardless of title or acquisition method, while specifically considering the nonmonetary contributions of a homemaker, the facilitation of property maintenance, and whether division serves as an alternative to maintenance.

family lawproperty

The case involved adjacent property owners along the Whitefish River disputing whether a deck extension and split-rail fences built by Woodward violated restrictive covenants recorded in 1994 that limited building locations, required single-family residential use, preserved trees, and prohibited fences or plantings interfering with river views. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's rulings that the fences did not violate the view covenant and that attorney fees were not warranted, but reversed the order requiring removal of the deck addition. The court reasoned that the Wagners' delay in suing until after construction was complete supported application of laches given the defendant's reliance on existing eaves and lack of prior objection, that any covenant violation was de minimis with no damages shown, and that the covenants did not otherwise bar the structures.

property