Charles E. Erdmann

The case Schelske v. Creative Nail Design, Inc. involved plaintiffs Mischelle and Rick Schelske suing multiple corporate defendants, primarily manufacturers of nail and cosmetic products along with mall and construction entities. Following an initial Supreme Court of Montana opinion issued on January 2, 1997, the appellants petitioned for rehearing, prompting responses and objections from the parties. Due to changes in the court's composition, the matter was reconsidered en banc. Upon review of the record, briefs, and rehearing materials, the court reaffirmed its prior opinion and denied the petition for rehearing.

torts & liabilityprocedure

In State v. Walker, the defendant was convicted of felony forgery after attempting to cash a fraudulent check at a Montana bank by posing as the payee and opening accounts with false identification. On appeal, Walker challenged the admission of still-frame photographs from bank surveillance video, the denial of a mistrial following a witness's reference to prior forgery investigations involving him, and the denial of a new trial based on alleged jury misconduct. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the photographs were properly admitted, that any prejudicial testimony was cured by the trial court's admonition to the jury, and that there was no jury misconduct requiring a new trial. A dissent argued that the improper testimony about past investigations denied Walker a fair trial and warranted a mistrial.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a negligence lawsuit by Emma Peschke and her family against Carroll College after Peschke, a cafeteria worker on campus, was shot and injured by John Aills, who had earlier been disruptive and armed in a campus chapel. Father Courtney had escorted Aills out of the chapel but did not warn others or contact security, and Aills then entered the cafeteria and shot Peschke and another employee. A jury found Carroll College not negligent, and the district court entered judgment for the college, which the Montana Supreme Court affirmed. The court held there was substantial credible evidence supporting the verdict, the jury instructions were proper, and allowing a videotaped reenactment was not error.

torts & liabilitycriminal law

The case involved a negligence claim by Wade Kolar against Dennis Bergo and others after Kolar was seriously injured in a motorcycle accident caused by Dennis running a stop sign while rushing to respond to what he believed was an emergency call from a child, which was actually part of an April Fool's Day practical joke orchestrated by David Salvi and involving Linda Bergo. Kolar sued Linda Bergo and David Salvi for their role in the joke, but the district court granted them summary judgment. The Montana Supreme Court reversed, determining that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the accident and injuries were foreseeable to Linda and David, and that reasonable minds could differ on the cause of the accident, making summary judgment inappropriate and requiring a jury trial.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved Sherman Bartlett's attempt to recover insurance proceeds from Allstate after a fire destroyed a home he had contracted to buy but had not yet closed on due to a lien issue; Bartlett had obtained a binder through an agent but never paid a premium and the policy was never issued. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to Allstate on the ground that Bartlett lacked an insurable interest in the property at the time of the loss, rendering the policy ineffective regardless of other claims. The court also affirmed dismissal of unfair trade practices, fraud, and punitive damages claims as they were tied to the lack of coverage, while reversing the award of certain costs to Allstate and remanding for recalculation limited to issues necessary for the insurable interest ruling, and finding a discovery error harmless.

propertybusiness & regulatoryprocedure

In State v. Swan, the defendant was charged with felony assault from an initial fight and later with felony aggravated assault after a second fight in jail that caused severe injuries to the victim, including permanent damage to his eye; the charges were joined for trial, and a jury convicted Swan only on the aggravated assault count. Swan appealed his conviction and the denial of his motion for a new trial, raising issues about jury instructions on lesser included offenses, his absence from an in-camera discussion of a jury note, the joinder of the charges, and claims of ineffective assistance by his trial counsel. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that Swan waived objections to the jury instructions and his absence from the hearing by failing to raise them timely, that counsel's strategic decisions on joinder did not constitute ineffective assistance under the Strickland standard, and that no prejudice was shown from the other alleged errors.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Amerimont, Inc. and the Smiths, who claimed a prescriptive easement allowing use of a roadway across property owned by David Gannett and subject to a conservation easement held by Montana Land Reliance. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's judgment that no such easement existed. The court reasoned that the historical use of the road by Amerimont and its predecessors had been permissive, based on neighborly accommodation and local custom among landowners rather than open and adverse use. Because prescriptive easements require adverse use for the statutory period, the claim failed.

property

The case involved Samuel Grenz's 1992 claim for workers' compensation benefits under Montana's Occupational Disease Act for degenerative arthritis and related conditions, which he attributed to his employment ending in 1985. The Workers' Compensation Court affirmed the Department of Labor and Industry's dismissal of the claim as barred by the two-year statute of limitations in § 39-72-403, MCA (1985). The court found that Grenz knew or should have known by at least 1988, based on his 1985 medical consultations and testimony, that his condition qualified as an occupational disease rather than solely his prior 1984 elbow injury. The decision applied the 1985 statutes governing claims filed after the last day of employment and reviewed the record for substantial evidence supporting the hearing examiner's findings on the claimant's knowledge and timeliness.

labor & employmentprocedure

Darrin Fenger, a permanent juvenile detention officer for Flathead County, was terminated after he and a coworker repeatedly allowed civilian visitors into secure areas of the facility despite oral warnings, a staff meeting reminder, and a circulated memo stating that violations would result in discipline up to termination. Fenger sued the county under the Wrongful Discharge From Employment Act, alleging the dismissal was without good cause. The district court granted summary judgment for the county, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, ruling that the undisputed facts showed Fenger failed to perform his job duties in accordance with supervisor directives, which constituted reasonable job-related grounds for termination as a matter of law under § 39-2-903(5), MCA, with no genuine issues of material fact remaining.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved Frank Danichek, who was arrested for DUI in Helena, Montana, refused a breathalyzer test leading to a 90-day suspension of his driver's license under the implied consent law, and was then convicted of DUI. He appealed, arguing that the license suspension constituted punishment, thus barring the criminal prosecution under the Double Jeopardy Clause of the U.S. and Montana Constitutions. The Supreme Court of Montana affirmed the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss, holding that the suspension serves a remedial purpose of protecting public safety rather than punishing the offender. Therefore, it does not trigger double jeopardy protections against multiple punishments for the same offense.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved real estate brokers seeking a commission from property sellers after a sale agreement fell through following a fire on the property and subsequent negotiations. The district court ruled that the brokers were not entitled to the commission, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed this decision. The court found that the original buyer was not financially able to complete the purchase, and the sellers had not engaged in any wrongful conduct that prevented the sale. Therefore, under the terms of the listing agreement, no commission was due since a ready, willing, and able buyer was not procured.

property

This case involved a dispute over the proper venue for a tort lawsuit filed by Robert Spoonheim against Norwest Bank Montana, N.A., a federally chartered national banking association, stemming from issues with a budget account managed under a bankruptcy plan. Norwest appealed the district court's denial of its motion to change venue from Cascade County to Yellowstone County, arguing that a 1995 statute required venue in the county where its resident agent was located. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that the statute applies only to corporations incorporated in another state and does not include federally chartered banking associations, so the general rule for non-resident defendants allows the plaintiff to designate any county, making Cascade County proper. The court also awarded damages to Spoonheim for defending against a meritless appeal.

procedure

The case involved Leslie McQuiston, who was charged with sexual intercourse without consent and incest based on an incident in 1989 where he allegedly forced his adoptive daughter Heidi to engage in sexual intercourse, resulting in three children confirmed by paternity tests. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed McQuiston's convictions, ruling that the district court did not err in admitting testimony about other acts, that the convictions did not violate double jeopardy, and that sentencing without a mandatory sex offender evaluation was appropriate since the victim was over 16 at the time. The court reasoned that the evidence supported the convictions and that the sentencing decision was within the district court's discretion given the defendant's denial of the crimes.

criminal law

The case involved Ricky Wessell, whose driver's license was seized and suspended under Montana's implied consent law after his arrest for suspected driving under the influence. Wessell consented to a breath test at the police station, but the testing instrument failed its internal standards check twice; he did not submit to a blood test due to a stipulated psychological inability. The district court denied his petition to reinstate the license, finding that he had refused the test. The Montana Supreme Court reversed, holding that an inability to complete a test due to a condition equivalent to a physical or psychological disability does not constitute a refusal under § 61-8-403(4), MCA, even if the driver did not ultimately provide a sample.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Stuit, the defendant was convicted of felony criminal endangerment after firing multiple shots into walls and a door jamb of his home while his common-law wife's young children slept nearby. Stuit appealed, arguing that the district court improperly allowed a police officer to testify about the date of the shooting and the shooter's identity based on out-of-court statements from the mother and daughter, which he claimed were inadmissible hearsay. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that any error in admitting the hearsay was harmless because the daughter's direct eyewitness testimony established the key facts of the shooting and the officer's other observations provided corroboration. The court reasoned that the specific date was not material to the charge and that the identity testimony was merely cumulative, applying the harmless error standard that requires showing beyond a reasonable doubt that the evidence did not affect the trial outcome.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a custody dispute over A.R.A., a minor child, following the death of her mother Tracy in 1992. After Tracy's death, her husband Patrick Erger petitioned for custody, while the child's natural father Bill Askren sought to assume custody as the surviving parent. The district court awarded custody to Patrick based on the best interests of the child, but the Montana Supreme Court reversed that decision. The court reasoned that a non-parent may obtain custody over a natural parent only if the parent's rights have first been terminated or otherwise lost through statutory means such as abuse, neglect, or abandonment; because no such showing was made here regarding Bill, the best-interests analysis was not reached and custody was awarded to the natural father.

family law

In State v. New, the defendant appealed from his convictions for drug possession offenses, arguing that the district court should have suppressed evidence found during a probation officer's search of his vehicle because it derived from an earlier illegal search of his person by a sheriff's deputy. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the convictions. The court held that the probation officer's search was valid because it was supported by independent reasonable suspicion based on information known to the officer prior to the illegal search, and it was not an exploitation of the prior illegality under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved Victoria Kloepfer's appeal from a Workers' Compensation Court judgment denying her permanent total disability benefits after she sustained an occupational disease and subsequent back injury while working as a laborer for Bechtel Construction Company. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial. The court held that Kloepfer was not permanently totally disabled under § 39-71-116(23), MCA, because substantial credible evidence supported the lower court's findings that her physical condition did not preclude full-time work and that her inability to work stemmed from lack of motivation rather than pain. Conflicting medical testimony was resolved in favor of the independent panel's conclusion that she could perform sedentary or light-duty work, and the treating physician's view that she could work at least part-time.

labor & employment

This case is a divorce appeal concerning the division of the marital estate between David and Mayla Stufft, along with awards of child support for their two minor children and maintenance to Mayla. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's equal division of assets valued at about $185,000 each and its adoption of proposed findings, but reversed and remanded the child support award of $739 per month per child and the $2,000 monthly maintenance for up to two years. The court reasoned that the findings on David's income from his law practice lacked evidentiary support and that maintenance must be reconsidered in light of revised child support obligations and David's available financial resources under state statutes. The matter was sent back for further findings consistent with the opinion.

family lawproperty

This case involved a dispute between the estate of Fred Pelzman and Joe Lee over possession of an 800-acre ranch in Montana that Lee had leased from Pelzman. After Pelzman's death, the estate terminated the lease effective January 1, 1987, and demanded that Lee vacate, but Lee refused and asserted rights under prior agreements; earlier litigation had already determined that Lee held only a right of first refusal that had not been triggered. The district court granted summary judgment to the estate on its unlawful detainer claim, ordering Lee to leave the property, and set a $60,000 supersedeas bond pending appeal. On review, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that no genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the lease termination and that Lee's continued possession after notice triggered the unlawful detainer statute. The court also upheld the bond amount as reasonably calculated to cover the estate's lost interest, taxes, and other costs from the delay in selling the ranch.

propertyprocedure