Beth Baker

Trisha Lynn Peterson pleaded guilty to criminal mischief and theft by accountability after she and a co-defendant damaged a dog-wash machine at a car wash using a sledgehammer and prybar. As part of her plea, she agreed to pay restitution jointly and severally for the damage, but she contested the district court's award of the full replacement cost of a new machine ($21,050 or similar) rather than repair costs or used market value. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the restitution order, holding that the victim's testimony about failed repair attempts, manufacturer advice, and the machine's ongoing inoperability provided substantial evidence supporting replacement cost under the restitution statutes, and that the district court properly assessed the victim's credibility. The court rejected claims that the award exceeded legal limits or lacked evidentiary support, while noting Peterson's ability to pay was considered at sentencing.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Adams, the State charged Edmund Alvin Adams with multiple counts of incest and sexual intercourse without consent after his adopted daughter R.A. disclosed ongoing sexual abuse beginning when she was four years old. During trial, the district court admitted testimony from A.P., another adopted daughter from Adams's prior marriage, who described substantially similar abuse years earlier; Adams objected that the evidence was unfairly prejudicial under M. R. Evid. 403. A Ravalli County jury convicted Adams on all counts. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed, concluding the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the testimony and that trial counsel was not ineffective.

criminal law

The case involved unmarried parents Sebastian Keitel and Avanlee Okragly who had stipulated to a final parenting plan for their young child that included a clause awarding attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party in future enforcement litigation. Keitel moved to hold Okragly in contempt for alleged violations regarding parenting time, medical information, therapy, and changing the child's birth certificate, but the district court denied the motion after finding the claims unsubstantiated and awarded Okragly $14,880 in fees and costs. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining the fee amount was reasonable based on the attorney's testimony addressing the Plath factors, particularly given Keitel's failure to appear or present contrary evidence at the hearing.

family law

In Bradley v. Yellowstone Trails Ranch Owners’ Association, John and Lisa Bradley sued the subdivision’s owners’ association seeking a declaratory judgment to remove an agricultural designation from their lot so it could be developed for residential use. After the association acknowledged service but failed to file a timely answer, the district court entered default judgment for the Bradleys; the association then moved to set it aside, and the court granted that motion. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the association’s acknowledgment of service constituted an appearance that triggered the seven-day notice requirement of Montana Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2) before default judgment could be entered. Because that notice was not provided, the default judgment was premature and voidable, and other factors such as the association’s prompt post-judgment response and the policy favoring resolution on the merits supported setting it aside.

propertyprocedure

BMK Enterprises sued Bailey Enterprises and related parties for breach of contract after Bailey sold adjacent commercial property to a third party without first offering it to BMK under a right-of-first-refusal clause in their 2018 Buy-Sell Agreement for nearby storage-unit property. The district court held the clause unenforceable as a matter of law because it ambiguously described the property and granted summary judgment to the defendants. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court reversed, ruling that the trial court should have examined extrinsic evidence of the parties’ intent to resolve the ambiguity before declaring the provision void. The court remanded for that factual inquiry, noting that contract interpretation begins with the written language but requires extrinsic evidence when the text is unclear.

propertybusiness & regulatoryprocedure

The case involved the Montana Commissioner of Securities and Insurance fining Victory Insurance Company $75,000 for three violations of the Montana Insurance Code related to its role as a managing general agent, including failing to provide records in a usable CSV format as demanded. The district court upheld the agency's summary judgment and penalty, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed that decision. The court reasoned that Victory violated the requirement to provide access to records in usable form under § 33-2-1602(4), MCA, based on undisputed facts, and that the maximum fine was not arbitrary or capricious given evidence of willful obstruction and misrepresentation.

business & regulatoryprocedure

In State v. Hill, Thomas Jerry Hill appealed his conviction for attempted robbery following a guilty plea in the District Court, arguing that the court erred by refusing to allow briefing on his speedy trial claim raised at the change of plea hearing. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that Hill had waived his speedy trial rights by entering a voluntary guilty plea without first filing a proper motion and obtaining an adverse ruling. The court reasoned that merely noting the issue for the record did not preserve it for appeal under the rules of criminal procedure, and plain error review was not justified as there was no manifest injustice in the proceedings.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved the estate of John William Lea, who died intestate in 2018 survived by his spouse Stacey Kelly and two adult children from a prior marriage. After Stacey was removed as personal representative for cause and Jakob was appointed in her place, the district court approved a final distribution in 2024 that credited Stacey with certain assets including a disputed transfer and released her from liability, with the remainder going to the children; Stacey did not appear or object. Nearly a year later, Stacey moved under M.R.Civ.P. 60(b) to set aside the decree, claiming inadequate notice of proceedings and failure to receive her full intestate share under Montana law. The district court denied the motion, and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Stacey had not established any ground for relief under Rule 60(b), that proper notice had been mailed as required by statute, and that the motion amounted to an untimely attempt to relitigate issues rather than a proper basis for reopening the judgment.

family lawprocedure

In State v. Trombley, the Montana Supreme Court reviewed an appeal from a defendant challenging two aspects of his combined judgment for multiple felony DUI offenses and a probation revocation: the imposition of a $5,000 mandatory minimum fine under § 61-8-1008(1)(a)(i), MCA (even though fully suspended), and a condition allowing the probation office to reinstate suspended fines and fees upon noncompliance. The State conceded error on the second issue. The Court affirmed the fine's imposition and suspension, relying on its recent decision in State v. Cole that a suspended mandatory fine does not violate constitutional requirements regarding ability to pay, and remanded solely for entry of an amended judgment removing the probation reinstatement provision.

criminal lawprocedure

In Dolan v. Guenther, neighboring homeowners in a Montana subdivision disputed whether the Dolans held an implied easement by existing use for a small irrigation ditch crossing the Guenthers' lot to convey water. The district court granted partial summary judgment to the Guenthers, ruling that no such easement existed and dismissing the Dolans' claim for ditch interference. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the certificate of subdivision approval issued by the Department of Environmental Quality had required abandonment of the feeder ditches as a condition of the subdivision, which prevented creation of an implied easement by prior use. The court also upheld the award of attorney fees and costs to the Guenthers under the relevant statute and remanded for determination of appellate fees.

property

This case involved a challenge by several Montana business associations to the Attorney General's determination that Proposed Ballot Measure No. 10 was legally sufficient for the ballot. The measure would amend state law to define artificial persons and exclude political spending power from their authorized activities. The Attorney General declined to assess the measure's constitutionality under the First Amendment because a statute authorizing such review had been enjoined by a lower court. The Montana Supreme Court denied the petition, holding that precedent limits the Attorney General's legal sufficiency review to procedural matters and does not extend to substantive constitutional challenges. The Court further declined to address the petitioners' facial constitutional claims on the merits, reasoning that pre-election judicial review would be advisory since the measure had not yet qualified for the ballot.

electionsfree speechbusiness & regulatory

In this case, Roaring Lion Ranch, LLC, Sawtooth Ranch, LLC, and Richard and Shelley Knight sued YC Properties for abuse of process and malicious prosecution based on YC's conduct in an earlier water rights dispute involving senior and junior rights on Sawtooth Creek. The District Court sua sponte converted YC's motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment and dismissed the claims with prejudice. The Montana Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the conversion was an abuse of discretion and that the complaint sufficiently alleged facts supporting each element of the claims under Montana's liberal notice pleading standards, precluding dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6).

proceduretorts & liabilityproperty

In State v. Valenzuela, the Montana Supreme Court reviewed a district court's revocation of a deferred sentence for two counts of criminal possession of dangerous drugs and its calculation of credit for elapsed time under § 46-18-203(7)(b), MCA. The defendant had pleaded true to multiple probation violations, including missed drug tests, failure to report address changes, and absconding, leading to her commitment to the Department of Corrections with credit for time served and 148 days of elapsed time. The court affirmed the revocation and most of the credit calculation, finding substantial evidence of ongoing violations during the disputed periods based on the supervising officer's records, but remanded to add four additional days of elapsed-time credit for the initial period of compliance from December 1 to December 4, 2022. The decision rested on de novo review of the legality of the sentencing calculation and clear-error review of factual findings, concluding that the statute requires crediting time only when the record supports compliance.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a facial constitutional challenge by Montanans Against Irresponsible Densification to several 2023 Montana housing reform laws on zoning and land use, including requirements for accessory dwelling units and duplexes, and the Montana Land Use Planning Act. The Montana Supreme Court held that the challenges to the public participation provisions were justiciable but that the laws did not facially violate the constitutional right to participate or the right to equal protection. It vacated the district court's ruling on private restrictive covenants as nonjusticiable because no actual controversy existed regarding their enforcement. The reasoning centered on the standards for facial challenges, the requirement that similarly situated classes be identified for equal protection claims, and the prohibition on advisory opinions.

propertycivil rights

This case involved a divorced couple, Melissa Bartkowski and Graham Murphy, and a dispute over modifying their 2022 parenting plan for their daughter A.M. after Melissa's daughter from a prior marriage alleged that Graham had sexually abused her in 2019. Melissa petitioned to restrict Graham to supervised parenting time only, but the District Court found insufficient evidence of changed circumstances or a safety threat under Montana law and reinstated the original plan allowing unsupervised time. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the lower court did not clearly err in its factual findings given the limited evidence and that it acted within its discretion on minor plan adjustments and remote hearing procedures. The Court also rejected claims of error regarding the judge presiding via videoconference, noting the parties' agreement and lack of demonstrated prejudice.

family lawprocedure

Lauren Difolco and Sherry Spear filed sex discrimination claims after the Montana State Hospital promoted their male coworker Trent Martin to Treatment Rehabilitation Manager despite their greater education and experience in recreation therapy. A Hearing Officer found no discrimination based on the interviewers' assessment of Martin's superior performance and leadership skills, and the Human Rights Commission affirmed that decision. The District Court reversed, holding five factual findings clearly erroneous under the Montana Administrative Procedure Act and awarding damages and fees. The Montana Supreme Court reversed the District Court, concluding that substantial evidence supported the agency's findings and that the lower court exceeded its authority by reweighing conflicting evidence instead of applying the clearly erroneous standard. The Court reinstated the HRC decision and vacated the damages award.

labor & employmentcivil rights

This case concerned the termination of a father's parental rights to his young child, R.L.B., who had been removed from the mother's home following reports of domestic disturbance and later adjudicated a youth in need of care. The district court granted the Department of Public Health and Human Services' petition to terminate the father's rights based on abandonment and long-term incarceration after the father was convicted and imprisoned in Oregon. On appeal, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the termination, holding that the statutory criteria under §§ 41-3-609(1)(b) and 41-3-609(4)(c), MCA, were met by clear and convincing evidence. The court emphasized the father's lack of engagement or demonstrated intent to parent throughout the proceedings and prioritized the child's best interests, particularly given the child's genetic condition, autism, and need for consistent care.

family law

In City of Kalispell v. Doman, the defendant was convicted of obstructing a peace officer after refusing officers' orders to move away from a traffic stop while filming from a public sidewalk. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, concluding that sufficient evidence allowed a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Doman knowingly hindered the officers' enforcement of the law. The court declined to reach the defendant's as-applied free speech challenge to the obstruction statute because the claim was not preserved at trial and did not meet the criteria for plain error review.

criminal lawfree speech

In State v. West, the defendant was convicted by a jury of robbery, aggravated kidnapping, and criminal possession of dangerous drugs after a masked, armed man robbed a pharmacy in Columbia Falls, Montana, of Percocet and forced three employees into a bathroom. West appealed, arguing errors including delayed disclosure of a witness's hearing impairment under Brady, insufficient evidence for the robbery conviction, prosecutorial misconduct in referencing his drug addiction and using an unauthenticated video overlay in closing, ineffective assistance of counsel, and cumulative error. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, holding that the delayed disclosure was not prejudicial, sufficient evidence supported the robbery elements, the State's actions did not constitute misconduct warranting reversal, counsel was not ineffective, and no cumulative error deprived West of a fair trial. A dissent argued that the video presentation violated evidentiary rules and fairness standards.

criminal law

The case involved a mother's appeal from a district court order granting guardianship of her three children to the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services after the children were adjudicated as youths in need of care due to concerns of abuse and neglect. The Supreme Court of Montana affirmed the district court's decision, rejecting the mother's arguments that the Department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunite the family and that it applied an incorrect burden of proof without finding her unfit. The court reasoned that substantial evidence supported the findings that reunification efforts were reasonable and further efforts would be unproductive, and that proving parental unfitness is not required for guardianship under the applicable statutes.

family law