Archive | 7-0

RSS feed for this section

Great Falls Clinic v. Mont. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court

Great Falls Clinic v. Mont. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 2016 MT 245 (Oct. 4, 2016) (McGrath, C.J.) (7-0, petition granted, aff’d)

Issue: Whether the Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act (WDEA) applies to the parties’ relationship.

Short Answer: No.

Affirmed

Facts: Lisa Warrington was offered a job at Great Falls Clinic on October 7, 2014, while she was employed by Benefis Hospital. Warrington accepted the offer and gave two weeks’ notice to Benefis. Warrington signed a written employment contract on October 10, with both parties agreeing her employment would begin October 27, 2014. On October 24, Warrington’s last day at Benefis, the clinic called and told Warrington it would not employ her after all.

Warrington sued the clinic for breach of contract, promissory estoppel and bad faith.…

Wreszien v. State

Wreszien v. State, 2016 MT 242 (Sept. 28, 2016) (Shea, J.) (7-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court correctly concluded that the participants of three public employee retirement plans were not similarly situated; and (2) whether the district court correctly concluded that employer contributions to the DB Trust do not violate substantive due process.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; and (2) yes.

Affirmed

Facts: Plaintiffs are state university employees, and must participate in one of three Montana Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) plans: the DB plan, the DC plan, or the University plan. All covered employees participate in the DB plan unless, within one year of hire, they choose to join the DC plan or, if applicable, the University plan.…

Montana Immigrant Justice Alliance v. Bullock

Montana Immigrant Justice Alliance v. Bullock, 2016 MT 104 (May 10, 2016) (Cotter, J.; Baker, J., concurring) (7-0, aff’d & rev’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred in holding that MIJA has standing to challenge LR 121; (2) whether the district court erred in concluding that LR 121 is preempted by federal law; and (3) whether the district court erred in awarding attorney’s fees to MIJA.

Short Answer: (1) No; (2) no, except for its holding that one section of the law was not preempted; and (3) yes.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part

Facts: During the 2011 legislative session, the Montana Legislature passed House Bill 638, denying certain state-funded services to “illegal aliens,” and submitted the act to Montana voters as a legislative referendum.…

In the Matter of KB

In the Matter of KB, 2016 MT 73 (March 29, 2016) (McKinnon, J.) (7-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over KB’s abuse and neglect proceeding, and (2) whether Father received ineffective assistance of counsel.

Short Answer: (1) No, and (2) no.

Affirmed

Facts: KB was removed from her mother’s care in November 2012, at the age of 5, due to concerns about Mother’s inability to protect KB from domestic violence. KB was placed in kinship foster care with her aunt and uncle, where she has remained. Her younger sister, TH, also lives with aunt and uncle.

KB was adjudicated a youth in need of care in 2013, and the Department drafted a treatment plan for Father.…

State v. Awbery

State v. Awbery, 2016 MT 48 (March 1, 2016) (McGrath, C.J.; Cotter, J., concurring) (7-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court properly excluded evidence that some of the victims had suffered prior sexual abuse by others; (2) whether Awbery is entitled to a new trial based on prosecutorial misconduct; and (3) whether Awbery is entitled to a new trial based on the cumulative effect of several alleged errors.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; (2) no; and (3) no.

Affirmed

Facts: The state charged Awbery with two counts of incest against his daughter, AA, when she was 12 or younger; sexual assault and sexual intercourse without consent against AA’s half-sister, JG, when she was 16 or younger; sexual intercourse without consent again IA when she was 12 or younger; and sexual assault against NH when she was 16 or younger.…

State v. Colburn

State v. Colburn, 2016 MT 41 (Feb. 23, 2016) (McGrath, C.J.; McKinnon, J., concurring) (7-0, rev’d & remanded)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred in disqualifying Colburn’s expert witness from testifying at trial; and (2) whether the district court erred in its application of the Rape Shield law to exclude evidence Colburn offered at trial.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; and (2) yes.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial

Facts: The state charged Colburn with two counts of incest involving his daughter, CC, one count of sexual intercourse without consent and two counts of sexual assault involving a neighbor girl, RW, all felonies. Both girls were 11 years old at the time of the offenses. RW testified at trial that Colburn touched her private parts manually and with his penis.…

In the Matter of the Adoption of AMS, MAS, and AWS

In the Matter of the Adoption of AMS, MAS, and AWS, 2016 MT 22 (Jan. 26, 2016) (Baker, J.) (7-0, rev’d)

Issue: (1) Whether Father was properly served by publication, and (2) whether the district court erred by granting the petition for adoption and termination.

Short Answer: (1) No, and (2) yes.

Reversed and remanded

Facts: Father and Mother are the biological parents of three minor children. Grandfather is the children’s maternal grandfather. Father and Mother married in 2005 and divorced in 2013. Mother and Grandfather live in Billings, and Father lives in Los Angeles.…

Cleveland v. Ward

Cleveland v. Ward, 2016 MT 10 (Jan. 12, 2016) (Shea, J.; Cotter, J., concurring) (7-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court improperly excluded trial testimony of Cleveland’s treating physician; (2) whether the district court improperly excluded trial testimony of Cleveland’s physical therapist; (3) whether the district court erred in granting a directed verdict on Cleveland’s claim that her rotator cuff tear and shoulder arthritis were caused by the collision; and (4) whether the district court erred in concluding that Cleveland could not recover damages incurred by Shelby House.

Short Answer: (1) No; (2) no; (3) no; and (4) no.

Affirmed

Rose v. Rose

Rose v. Rose, 2016 MT 7 (Jan. 12, 2016) (Baker, J.) (7-0, aff’d)

Issue: Whether the district court erred in allocating delinquent tax liability equally between the parties after taxing authorities determined one party was an “innocent spouse.”

Short Answer: No.

Affirmed

Facts: Sherri and Michael married in 1994 and have three children. They lived in Billings for most of their marriage, separating in late 2012. Sherri petitioned for dissolution in March 2013, and the district court held a bench trial in April 2014.…

Kulko v. Davail, Inc.

Kulko v. Davail, Inc., 2015 MT 340 (Dec. 8, 2015) (Cotter, J.) (7-0, rev’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred in concluding that corporate dissolution is an exclusive remedy under § 35-1-939, MCA; and (2) whether the district court erred in dismissing Kulko’s claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the basis that the corporate dissolution eliminated any case or controversy.

Short Answer(1) Yes; and (2) yes.

Reversed and remanded

Facts: Alex and Sharon Horn incorporated Davail, Inc. in Montana in 1982 for estate planning purposes. Their children – David Kulko, Ilsa Kaye, and Michael Horn – are Davail’s sole shareholders, officers, and directors. Kulko owns 46% of the shares and is a director and vice-president; Kaye owns 46% and is a director and president; and Horn owns the remaining 8%.…