Fred J. Weber

The case involved Robert Schaal, a professor at Flathead Valley Community College, who sued after his one-year employment contract was not renewed for the 1992-93 academic year. Schaal claimed breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violation of due process, alleging that the college failed to follow its own grievance and personnel policies. The district court granted summary judgment on wrongful discharge and, after trial, dismissed the remaining claims, entering judgment for the college. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Schaal did not comply with the required grievance form and procedures, had no reasonable expectation of contract renewal creating a property interest, and thus had no valid claims under contract or due process. The core reasoning centered on the absence of any contractual right to arbitration or continued employment beyond the contract term.

labor & employmentprocedurecivil rights

In State v. Pace, the defendant was charged with burglary and deliberate homicide under the felony murder rule after a man was found stabbed to death in his ransacked home, with the state alleging the crimes occurred during a burglary. The Montana Supreme Court reversed the convictions and remanded for a new trial, holding that the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of two prior incidents involving the defendant: an arrest for panhandling and carrying a concealed weapon, and an arrest for armed robbery. The court reasoned that these other acts were not sufficiently similar in their elements or circumstances to the charged offenses of burglary-homicide to satisfy the similarity requirement of the Modified Just Rule under Rule 404(b), M.R.Evid., making further analysis of the rule's other elements unnecessary.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a criminal prosecution in which defendant Graves was convicted by a jury of sexual intercourse without consent after complainant Betsy Baker testified that he penetrated her vagina while she was asleep following his offer to drive her home after her boyfriend's DUI arrest. Graves appealed the verdict and sentence on five grounds: sufficiency of the evidence, admission of the substance of a 911 call reporting the incident, use of his post-arrest silence regarding consent during police questioning, the trial court's refusal to reread testimony to the jury, and whether the sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence in full, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, that the challenged evidentiary rulings and trial procedures were not erroneous, and that the sentence was within statutory limits and properly justified on the record without violating constitutional protections. The court reviewed the claims for abuse of discretion or legal error and found none.

criminal lawprocedure

This case concerned landlords who sought to evict tenants for breaching a lease term requiring renters' insurance after the tenants' policy was canceled due to poor credit and they could not obtain new coverage. The district court ruled for the landlords, awarding them possession plus costs and fees, and concluded that accepting monthly rent payments did not waive the right to terminate for the insurance breach. The Montana Supreme Court reversed, holding that under § 70-24-423, MCA, a landlord's acceptance of full rent payments with knowledge of a known default constitutes a waiver of the right to terminate the lease for that breach. The court reasoned that the statute's plain language applies to any breach, not only nonpayment of rent, so the landlords had no valid basis for eviction after accepting three months of rent.

property

This case involved a workers' compensation claim where claimant Victoria Kloepfer sought benefits for a back injury sustained during physical therapy at a work hardening center for a prior arm condition. The Workers' Compensation Court awarded her benefits and costs but disallowed the $750 fee charged by her treating physician for a deposition, relying on precedents from Witty v. Pluid and Baeta v. Don Tripp Trucking that limited expert witness fees to $10 per day under § 26-2-501, MCA. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court reversed, holding that those cases did not require applying the statutory fee limit to workers' compensation proceedings. The Court reasoned that § 25-10-201(9), MCA, permits recovery of reasonable and necessary expenses according to the established practice of the Workers' Compensation Court, which has historically included physician deposition costs in such cases.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case is an appeal from a district court's designation of Ronald Evans as a dangerous offender following his guilty plea to negligent vehicular homicide and two counts of negligent vehicular assault after a drunk-driving collision that killed an infant and seriously injured two adults. The Montana Supreme Court held that the record contained substantial evidence supporting the designation, including Evans's extensive juvenile criminal history, continued drinking, lack of remorse, and arrest for disorderly conduct while on bond. However, the court remanded the case because the district court failed to articulate specific reasons for the designation and instead merely repeated statutory language and general considerations from the presentence report and case law. The opinion clarifies that under § 46-18-404, MCA, a sentencing court must state particular findings drawn from the record when designating an offender as dangerous for parole purposes.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned the City of Bozeman's effort, on behalf of the Montana Department of Transportation, to condemn 8.72 acres of the Vanimans' property for a highway interchange off-ramp, rest area, and visitors center. The Vanimans objected to the planned inclusion of space for the private Bozeman Chamber of Commerce within the visitors center. The district court issued a preliminary condemnation order but directed that the Chamber's portion of the building be severed from the project. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the taking was lawful because the core project served a public purpose and the Chamber's presence had not been part of the original condemnation request, but that the Chamber could not occupy a substantial part of the facility because its private use was not de minimis and failed tests requiring the use to be public, state-controlled, and not a significant private benefit.

propertyprocedure

The case concerned a challenge by property developers (The Greens at Fort Missoula, LLC) to a city-wide referendum seeking to repeal Missoula City Ordinance No. 2877, which had annexed and zoned an 82-acre former military site for residential use with historical and open-space protections. The District Court granted summary judgment to the City of Missoula and intervenor Save the Fort, Inc., allowing the referendum to proceed, and the electorate later voted to repeal the ordinance. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the referendum was a valid exercise of the people's reserved power under the Montana Constitution (Art. III, Sec. 5) and that statutory limits or judicial distinctions between legislative and administrative acts could not restrict that power. The Court rejected arguments that the zoning decision was purely administrative or that the referendum violated equal-protection principles by affecting only some voters. Concurrences emphasized avoiding constitutional questions where possible and noted the broad scope of referendum authority.

electionsproperty

This case arose from a 14-year extramarital relationship in which Harold Patten provided financial support to Phyllis Raddatz in exchange for sex, companionship, drinking, and her taking prescription tranquilizers and sleeping pills he supplied; after the relationship ended, the Pattens sued for an injunction against harassment, and Raddatz counterclaimed for negligence and negligence per se based on the drug transfers that allegedly caused her addiction. The district court granted the Pattens partial summary judgment on those counterclaims and denied Raddatz's cross-motion. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the in pari delicto doctrine barred recovery because both parties knowingly participated in the illegal distribution of prescription drugs, that no genuine issue of material fact existed, and that Raddatz failed to establish the elements required for negligence per se under the relevant statute.

torts & liabilityprocedurecriminal law

This case involved the division of military Special Separation Benefits (SSB) payments received by Stephen Blair after the 1993 dissolution of his marriage to Kathy Blair. The parties' original property settlement agreement, incorporated into the divorce decree, awarded Kathy a percentage of Stephen's future military retirement pay based on their twelve years of marriage. After Stephen voluntarily separated from the military early in 1994 and received SSB payments under federal law, Kathy moved to modify the decree to claim a share of those benefits. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court's ruling that the SSB payments constituted marital property or early retirement benefits subject to division, holding that the court retained jurisdiction to address the issue and that res judicata did not bar the claim.

family law

This case involved a dispute over whether neighboring landowners held an easement across a parcel of property in Park County, Montana, purchased by appellant Lynne McDonald in 1979. The easement stemmed from a 1975 document granting the State of Montana a right-of-way for a 'Dozer Road' across the land, which the plaintiffs and intervenors sought to use for access. The district court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs, finding that an easement had been created, had not been extinguished, and that McDonald had actual and constructive notice of it. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the granting document and applicable state law supported the existence of the easement without material factual disputes requiring trial. The court rejected arguments that the easement had been abandoned or that McDonald's lack of prior inspection affected its validity.

property

This case involved a divorced couple's dispute over modifying child support and spousal maintenance obligations under a 1986 dissolution decree. After their son began living with the father, the district court allowed the father to cease child support payments during periods of custody but ruled that the mother owed no support and that maintenance payments must continue. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the maintenance ruling, holding that the father failed to demonstrate substantially changed circumstances rendering the original $300 monthly award unconscionable under § 40-4-208, MCA, given the mother's health limitations, income disparity, and the 22-year marriage. It reversed and remanded on child support, concluding the district court erred by deviating from the Uniform Child Support Guidelines without adequate written findings as required by § 40-4-204, MCA.

family law

In Contreras v. Vannoy Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc., a fifteen-year-old maintenance trainee sued an HVAC contractor after he accidentally dislodged a gas valve while cleaning a boiler room, causing a leak that ignited and severely burned him; he claimed the contractor negligently failed to inspect the valve under its maintenance contract with the library. The jury found the defendant not negligent, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the verdict and the denial of the plaintiff's motions for partial summary judgment and directed verdict. The court reasoned that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the contractor had a contractual duty to maintain that specific valve, precluding summary resolution, and that the jury was properly instructed on negligence without applying res ipsa loquitur, as duty and control were disputed.

torts & liabilitylabor & employment

This case concerned the Montana Board of Public Education's denial of Gerald Thompson's application to renew his teaching certificate, which was based on allegations of sexual misconduct by former students and others that led to criminal charges. The District Court reversed the Board's order after reviewing the record and determining that investigators had suppressed evidence, the County Attorney's actions violated due process, and the Hearing Examiner's findings lacked substantial credible evidence, including reliance on flawed expert testimony. The Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the Board's decision could not stand once the improper evidence was set aside and that the remaining record did not support a finding that Thompson lacked good moral and professional character.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

This case involved a challenge to the 1989 will of Alf A. Lien, a Montana farmer who died in 1991, by contestant Dr. Clifton Berglee who sought to enforce an earlier 1987 will that favored him. Berglee alleged the later will was invalid due to the testator's lack of capacity, undue influence by Mabel Gobbs and her husband, fraud, and restraint. The District Court granted summary judgment to Gobbs as personal representative of the estate, finding no genuine issues of material fact, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that Berglee failed to meet his burden under Montana probate law to present affirmative evidence creating triable issues on any of the four grounds, as his claims rested on speculative or conclusory assertions insufficient to defeat the motion. The 1989 will, which divided the estate equally among four first cousins and revoked the prior will, was therefore upheld for probate.

family lawproperty

The case concerned whether the City of Billings, as owner and operator of a municipal water and sewer utility, was required to pay annual Public Service Commission (PSC) and Montana Consumer Counsel (MCC) fees assessed by the Department of Revenue based on the utility's gross operating revenues. The District Court ruled that the City must pay the fees regardless of whether its rates had increased by more than twelve percent in a given year, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed. The court reasoned that the governing statutes (sections 69-1-223, 69-1-402, and related provisions) define municipal utilities as "regulated companies" subject to the fees on all gross operating revenues from regulated activities, without providing an exemption tied to the twelve-percent rate-increase threshold that limits PSC rate-review jurisdiction. It further noted that the MCC's statutory role in municipal rate proceedings continues independently of PSC oversight, confirming the legislature's intent that the fees apply annually.

business & regulatorytaxes

This case involved a dispute over payment for livestock hauling services under a contract between Kenneth Greenwood and Steve Nelson Trucking, Inc., where Greenwood claimed an overcharge in violation of rate statutes and sought damages for two injured calves. After Nelson Trucking obtained a default judgment in Justice Court for the unpaid amount, Greenwood filed a new action in District Court alleging overcharges and other claims. The District Court granted summary judgment to Nelson Trucking, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the claims were barred by res judicata because the underlying contract was not void despite any rate issues, and the overcharge allegations lacked factual support. The court also affirmed the denial of Nelson Trucking's request for attorney's fees, finding no statutory, contractual, or equitable basis under the circumstances.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case involved plaintiff Ida Mills' claim that attorney J. Brian Tierney negligently represented her in a real estate contract-for-deed transaction by failing to adequately investigate and address her concerns about missing escrow payments and potential misconduct by the escrow agent. After the escrow agent embezzled over $30,000 intended to pay off the contract, Mills sued multiple parties including Tierney for negligence. The district court granted summary judgment to Tierney, but the Montana Supreme Court reversed and remanded. The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether Tierney breached his duty by not taking steps to protect Mills' interests and whether his inaction proximately caused her loss, precluding summary judgment as a matter of law.

torts & liabilityprocedurebusiness & regulatory

In State v. Bradley, the defendant was convicted by a jury in the Sixteenth Judicial District Court of Custer County of sexual intercourse without consent, a felony, based on conduct with Sherri Hutchins when she was 15 years old in 1989. Bradley appealed, arguing that the court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the spousal exemption under § 45-5-511, MCA (1989), and the related defense allowing proof that he reasonably believed the victim was over 16, as the couple had been living together as husband and wife. The Montana Supreme Court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, holding that the jury instructions omitted key provisions of the 1989 statutes regarding spousal exemptions and reasonable belief defenses, which were questions of fact for the jury.

criminal lawfamily law

In Steiner v. Department of Highways, a laborer employed by a contractor on a federally funded Montana bridge reconstruction project fell from an unguarded scaffold overhang and sued the state Department of Highways for injuries, alleging breach of duties arising from the project's Certification Acceptance Agreement with the Federal Highway Administration and the Montana Scaffolding Act. The district court, after a nonjury trial, entered judgment for the defendant, finding no nondelegable contractual duty to ensure safe scaffolding or compliance with safety standards and concluding that the plaintiff's own negligence was the primary cause. The Montana Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the contract imposed a nondelegable duty on the Department to assure guardrails and other safety measures, that undisputed facts showed a breach and proximate cause, and that the district court's contrary findings and conclusions were erroneous.

torts & liability