Archive | Choice of law

RSS feed for this section

Talbot v. WMK-Davis, LLC

Talbot v. WMK-Davis, LLC, 2016 MT 247 (Oct. 4, 2016) (Cotter, J.; McKinnon, J., dissenting) (6-1, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred in determining that Montana courts will not conduct a choice of law analysis when determining the validity of a workers’ compensation subrogation lien under Oberson v. Federated Mutual Insur. Co.; and (2) whether the district court erred in grating summary judgment to Talbot.

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

Affirmed

Harrington v. Energy West, Inc.

Harrington v. Energy West, Inc., 2015 MT 233 (Aug. 11, 2015) (Baker, J.) (5-0, aff’d & rev’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court correctly considered evidence outside the pleadings in deciding Energy West’s 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss; and (2) whether the district court correctly dismissed Harrington’s suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; ad (2) no.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings

Facts: Energy West is a Montana corporation with its principal place of business in Montana. It is a subsidiary of Gas Natural, Inc., an Ohio corporation with corporate offices in Montana and Ohio.

In February 2011, either Energy West or Gas Natural (the parties dispute which) hired Harrington as a corporate controller.…

Masters Group Internat’l, Inc. v. Comerica Bank

Masters Group Internat’l, Inc. v. Comerica Bank, 2015 MT 192 (July 1, 2015) (Baker, J. wrote an opinion in which Shea, J., joined; Shea, J. concurred; Rice, J., concurred and dissented and was joined by McKinnon, J.; Cotter, J., concurred and dissented, and was joined by McGrath, C.J., and Wheat, J.) (aff’d & rev’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Comerica’s motion to sever; (2) whether the district court erred in applying Montana law despite the contractual choice-of-law provision; (3) whether the district court erred in not deciding contract formation issues as a matter of law; (4) whether the district court erred by allowing TARP evidence to be presented to the jury.

Short Answer: (1) No (Baker, Shea, Cotter, McGrath, Wheat); (2) yes (Baker, Shea, Cotter, McGrath, Wheat); (3) no (5-Baker, Shea, Cotter, McGrath, Wheat- to 2-Rice, McKinnon); (4) yes (7-0 agree admission was error, but 4 (Baker, Shea, Rice.…