Jean A. Turnage

The case concerned whether real estate brokers Ted Topolski and Bill Walker, members of the Helena Association of Realtors, could be compelled to arbitrate a dispute with nonmember client Clare Kendall over a real estate transaction. The district court granted summary judgment to the Association, ruling that the brokers were bound to arbitrate under the terms of their membership and the REALTORS Code of Ethics. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the membership agreements required arbitration of such disputes and that Montana's statutory limits on arbitration agreements did not bar enforcement here. The court reasoned that the Association's bylaws and code, to which the members had agreed, extended to disputes with nonmembers who consented to arbitration, and federal law supported the validity of the agreement.

business & regulatoryprocedure

In State v. Simmons, defendant Brian Paul Simmons was arrested for DUI in Montana and moved to suppress results of his breath test and his statements to police, arguing that the state's Implied Consent Advisory gave misleading information about license consequences for out-of-state drivers who refuse testing and that he had invoked his right to counsel during Miranda warnings. The district court denied the motion, Simmons pled guilty while reserving the right to appeal, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that any inaccuracies in the advisory did not invalidate the consent or require suppression of the test results and that Simmons had clarified he did not wish to have an attorney present before answering questions. The decision rested on the conclusion that the defendant had validly consented to testing and had waived counsel after initial confusion.

criminal lawprocedure

This case concerned a dispute over nursing home insurance benefits after the insurer, Bankers Life, rescinded a policy issued to Jack Steinback and denied a claim following his admission to a nursing home. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to the insurer on the breach of contract claim. The court held that the policy application contained a material misrepresentation because the Steinbacks answered "no" to a question about prior treatment for memory loss or organic brain disorder, even though Mr. Steinback had been treated for moderate to severe organic brain deficit and possible Alzheimer's shortly before applying. Because this undisclosed information would have led the insurer to deny coverage, the misrepresentation justified rescission of the policy.

business & regulatoryhealthcare

In Hall v. Heckerman, Glenn and Ada Hall sued Doris Heckerman seeking a declaratory judgment establishing an easement by necessity or prescription over her land to access their property, which they had purchased in 1976 and which was landlocked from public roads. The District Court dismissed the action, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that res judicata barred the suit because the Halls had previously prevailed in a 1996 quiet title action against Heckerman and others involving the same tract and easement issues. The core reasoning was that the Halls had constructive notice of the relevant deeds at the time of the prior litigation and could have raised their current claims then, so the issues and subject matter were the same.

propertyprocedure

In Pengra v. State, Steve Pengra sued the Montana Department of Corrections for negligence that allegedly resulted in the rape and murder of his wife by a probationer, and the parties reached a settlement before trial. Pengra sought to seal the settlement agreement, citing privacy rights for himself and his minor daughter, while news organizations intervened to oppose sealing on grounds of the public's right to know. The district court denied the motion to seal, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that § 2-9-303, MCA, mandates that all settlements of claims against the State be available for public inspection without exception for individual privacy interests. The court reasoned that the statute's language is mandatory and does not permit balancing privacy against the constitutional right to know in this context. The court also addressed but did not grant the cross-appeal regarding attorney fees for the intervenors.

free speechcivil rightsprocedure

In State v. Swan, the defendant was convicted by a jury in Montana district court of deliberate homicide in the 1997 death of Ginny Hann, whose body was found near Missoula with evidence linking Swan, including DNA, hair, fibers, and shoe prints. Swan appealed his conviction, claiming he was denied his constitutional right under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments and the Montana Constitution to waive counsel and represent himself at trial after initially requesting to do so while also seeking law library access and new appointed counsel. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that Swan's request to represent himself was not unequivocal because the record showed he primarily sought substitute counsel and library privileges rather than proceeding pro se, and he did not renew the self-representation request after receiving new counsel. The court reasoned that an unequivocal waiver is required to prevent defendants from manipulating the mutual exclusivity of the rights to counsel and self-representation, and the trial court properly denied the equivocal request.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights