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

The case involved Brent Arthur Wilson, who faced multiple felony and misdemeanor charges for using fraudulent documents to illegally take possession of real property in Lake County, Montana. After a mental health evaluation confirmed his fitness, the district court allowed Wilson to represent himself following his waiver of counsel and later admitted certain journals into evidence at trial, resulting in his conviction. On appeal, Wilson argued that his waiver of counsel was invalid, that the journals were improperly authenticated, and that his sentence was illegal because it was augmented due to his refusal to confess. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentence, holding that substantial credible evidence supported the knowing and intelligent waiver, that plain error review of the journals was unwarranted, and that the sentence complied with statutory criteria without punishing Wilson for invoking his right against self-incrimination.

criminal lawpropertyprocedure

This case involves the dissolution of the marriage between Shannon and Travis Johnson and a dispute over the paternity of their child C.I.J., where DNA testing revealed that Justin Walak was the biological father rather than Travis, who was listed on the birth certificate. Walak intervened in the proceedings to establish parental rights, but the district court initially determined that no parent-child relationship existed between Walak and C.I.J. based on Walak's delay in asserting rights. After a post-trial motion, the district court vacated its initial order and granted Walak parental rights, but the Montana Supreme Court reversed this decision, holding that the court lacked statutory authority under Montana law to modify or revoke its prior judgment determining the nonexistence of the parent-child relationship.

family law

In City of Billings v. Staebler, the defendant was convicted in municipal court of misdemeanor DUI and seatbelt violations after a jury trial. He appealed to the district court and then the Montana Supreme Court, arguing that the prosecutor's comments during voir dire and closing arguments were unfairly prejudicial and that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object. The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, holding that the comments did not constitute reversible error because they were not inflammatory enough to deprive the defendant of a fair trial and because the evidence of guilt, including the officer's observations of erratic driving, glassy eyes, and failed sobriety tests, was overwhelming. The court further concluded that it did not need to reach the ineffective assistance claim once it determined there was no underlying error.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a dispute over interest calculation on a $280,000 loan made by Rayna Weiss to Scott Weiss in 2004, which was used to purchase an ownership interest held in Scott's name, in the context of their 2008 divorce proceedings and a prior appeal. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's ruling that Scott's nine repayments totaling $280,000 fully paid off the principal by December 2007 and that he owed Rayna $49,954.79 in interest at 10% per year on the unpaid balances. The court reasoned that the repayment schedule provided with each payment, which deducted amounts only from principal, along with Rayna's acceptance of those schedules without protest, showed an implicit agreement to apply payments solely to principal rather than first to accrued interest, and that simple interest calculations on the declining principal balances were appropriate.

family lawproperty

This case involved adoption proceedings for two biological siblings after their mother executed a waiver of parental rights and consent to adoption in 2008, transferring custody to their aunt and uncle (the guardians). The guardians later relinquished the children for adoption by a couple they selected through an agency, but in 2010 they moved to set aside their relinquishment and consent, claiming the pre-placement evaluation was fraudulent because it was prepared by an intern, omitted certain details like religious affiliation and medical history, and was not child-specific. The district court denied the motion, finding no fraud, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the guardians had not established actual or constructive fraud by clear and convincing evidence under state law and that relinquishments could not be revoked absent such fraud to ensure stability in the adoption process.

family law

The case involved Timothy Hop, whose vehicle was damaged in an accident caused by a Safeco-insured driver; Safeco paid for repairs but refused Hop's demand for residual diminished value (RDV), defined as the post-repair drop in the vehicle's market value. Hop filed a class-action complaint in district court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief plus damages, alleging Safeco had a company-wide practice of failing to investigate or pay RDV claims under the Unfair Trade Practices Act. The district court certified the class under Rule 23, but the Montana Supreme Court reversed, holding that an RDV claim is not ripe for adjudication because it does not qualify as damages "not reasonably in dispute" that must be paid before resolution of the underlying claim, unlike medical expenses or lost wages. The court further reasoned that Hop therefore lacked individual standing and the typicality required for class representation under Rule 23(a), requiring dismissal of the class action without prejudice.

business & regulatoryproceduretorts & liability

This case involved a challenge by the Gateway Opencut Mining Action Group to Gallatin County's efforts to establish interim and permanent zoning districts regulating gravel mining operations. The group sought to enjoin the process, arguing that the protest provisions in Montana's zoning statute, § 76-2-205(6), MCA, unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to private parties. Intervenors moved for summary judgment, claiming the dispute was moot because the county commission failed to meet mandatory statutory deadlines for acting on its resolution of intent to zone. The district court granted the motions, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the case became moot when the deadlines passed without required action and that the constitutional question never ripened since protests did not actually block the zoning plans.

business & regulatoryenvironmentprocedure

The case involved Norma Jean King, a tenured employee of the Hays/Lodge Pole Public School District who had served in various roles including high school principal, and was reassigned by the Board of Trustees to an elementary teaching position for the 2009-10 school year without prior written notice or a hearing. King appealed the reassignment through administrative channels, arguing that principal and teacher positions were not comparable under Montana law, but both the County and State Superintendents upheld the Board's decision. The District Court reversed, relying on prior precedent and a dictionary definition to find the positions functionally dissimilar. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court reversed the District Court, holding that under § 20-4-203, MCA, the positions of teacher and principal are comparable, the new contract provided equivalent or better salary and hours, and no statutory notice or hearing requirements applied to reassignments of tenured employees. The court remanded with instructions to reinstate the State Superintendent's decision affirming the reassignment.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involved a dispute over spousal maintenance payments under a 2002 marital dissolution agreement between Walter Wolf and Holly Wolf. The agreement required Walter to pay Holly $6,000 monthly until her death and stated the payments were non-modifiable, but it did not explicitly address the effect of remarriage. After Holly remarried in 2008, Walter stopped payments; her second marriage was later declared invalid and retroactive to the date of the marriage. The Montana Supreme Court reversed the district court's orders, holding that § 40-4-208(4), MCA, terminated Walter's maintenance obligation upon Holly's remarriage regardless of the later invalidity decree or the agreement's terms. The Court reasoned that the statute directly applied to end the obligation and that the parties' agreement did not override this statutory provision.

family law

The case involved the estate of an incapacitated patient who had been injured in a car accident, suing a medical center and related entities after the center declined to accept Medicaid payments for over $227,000 in care, filed liens instead, and pursued payment from the tortfeasor's insurance carrier. The estate claimed breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, and related violations arising from a patient services agreement signed by the patient's guardian. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the agreement properly required billing to available insurance, that Medicaid was not applicable, and that there was no error in the district court's interpretation of the Medicaid Act or its awards of prejudgment interest and attorney fees, while remanding for minor adjustments to interest calculations and appellate fees.

healthcareproceduretorts & liability

In State v. Burns, the defendant was charged with felony DUI per se after police responded to a welfare check on a vehicle with a passed-out driver, which led to observations of intoxication and his arrest; he later pled guilty while reserving appeal rights and was sentenced as a persistent felony offender. The Montana Supreme Court addressed four issues on appeal: denial of a speedy trial motion, denial of a motion to suppress evidence from the stop, denial of a motion to dismiss based on an allegedly invalid prior DUI conviction, and the PFO sentencing itself. The court affirmed the district court's rulings on all issues, holding that the initial welfare check was valid and evolved properly into a DUI investigation, the prior conviction met constitutional requirements, and PFO designation was permissible under statute and precedent such as Damon and Brendal because the current offense qualified as a felony. The core reasoning emphasized compliance with procedural rules, the validity of the underlying facts and prior convictions, and consistency with existing case law allowing PFO enhancements for felony DUI.

criminal lawprocedure

Gregory Ternes sued State Farm Fire and Casualty Company and prior homeowners Keith and Sue Eberhard after purchasing a Missoula residence, alleging harm from a C.L.U.E. insurance report on a 2006 water-seepage inquiry that was later withdrawn and from related disclosures. The District Court granted summary judgment to the defendants on multiple claims, and Ternes appealed. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed, concluding there were no genuine issues of material fact on whether the Giardinos' termination of a later buy-sell agreement or any other events caused Ternes damages attributable to State Farm or the Eberhards. The court reasoned that Ternes could not establish ascertainable loss from the report's origin, contents, or withdrawal, rendering further analysis of the Montana Consumer Protection Act claim unnecessary.

propertytorts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

The case involved Donald Stock's convictions for felony incest against his fourteen-year-old son and six-year-old daughter, as well as felony tampering with evidence. Stock appealed several pretrial rulings by the district court, including allowing the young daughter to testify via two-way electronic audio-video communication outside his presence, prohibiting him from interviewing or calling his four-year-old son as a witness, and admitting summary testimony about pornographic images from his computer. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, reasoning that the remote testimony complied with statutory requirements for protecting child victims, Stock failed to show substantial need for interviewing the young sibling who was deemed incompetent and at risk of harm, and he did not properly preserve objections to the computer evidence for appeal.

criminal lawprocedure

Dennis Deschamps sued the Estate of Larry Rasmussen and Treasure State Trailer Court over enforcement of a promissory note secured by a trust indenture for a mobile home park purchase, claiming the Estate's nonjudicial foreclosure should have been asserted as a compulsory counterclaim in prior litigation between the parties and attempting to raise previously time-barred fraud allegations as affirmative defenses. The district court denied Deschamps's motion for summary judgment, granted summary judgment to the Estate, and awarded attorney fees. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that nonjudicial foreclosure under the Small Tract Financing Act is a statutory remedy outside judicial proceedings and thus not a compulsory counterclaim, that Deschamps could not raise affirmative defenses without a judicial complaint filed against him, and that the note's contractual fee provisions entitled the Estate to recover costs. The court remanded for a hearing on fees.

propertyprocedure