Notes of Decisions
Silvestrone v. Park Cnty., 2007 MT 261 (Mont. 2007).
· cites it 39× “We do not need to determine here if the common law doctrine of judicial 5 immunity also survived Article II, Section 18, as the legislature enacted § 2-9-112, MCA, in 1977 to codify the doctrine of judicial immunity.”
Koppen v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 759 P.2d 173 (Mont. 1988).
· cites it 34× “The rationale in the District Court's Order began by quoting portions of § 2-9-112, MCA: (1) The State and other governmental units are immune from suit for acts or omissions of the judiciary.”
Mead v. McKittrick, 727 P.2d 517 (Mont. 1986).
· cites it 45× “As such, § 2-9-112, MCA, is not applicable here. The county, as plaintiff's employer should be held accountable for express or implied promises made to plaintiff regarding her employment.”
Brunsvold v. State, 820 P.2d 732 (Mont. 1991).
· cites it 81× “He named as defendants the State of Montana, the Department of Institutions, Warden Henry Risley of the Montana State Prison and probation officer James Bennett, who *734 incorrectly calculated his good time credits.”
Clark v. Dussault, 878 P.2d 239 (Mont. 1994).
· cites it 28× “" Section 2-9-112, MCA. We observed that district court judges have the exclusive authority to choose their own secretaries because of the "distinct and unique status" a personal secretary occupies among court employees.”
Hartsoe v. Tucker, 2013 MT 256 (Mont. 2013).
· cites it 11× “Judge Christopher agreed that Judge Tucker was immune, and granted Judge Tucker summary dismissal of the action with prejudice. It is from this dismissal that Hartsoe now appeals.”
Dorwart v. Caraway, 2002 MT 240 (Mont. 2002).
· cites it 4× “¶ 116 Under our 1972 Constitution, the government is not immune from suit unless the legislature enacts a statute by a two-thirds vote of each house.”
Rahrer v. Bd. of Psychologists, 2000 MT 9 (Mont. 2000).
· cites it 10× “) The District Court inferred that by using the word "includes," the legislature had intended to grant immunity to administrative agencies exercising quasi-judicial authority.”
Knutson v. State, 683 P.2d 488 (Mont. 1984).
· cites it 6× “In Section 2-9-112, MCA, it is provided: “Immunity from suit for judicial acts and omissions.”
United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Camp, 831 P.2d 586 (Mont. 1992).
· cites it 4× “Did the District Court err in determining that Sheriff Camp was immune from suit under the judicial immunity statute found at § 2-9-112, MCA? 3. If Sheriff Camp enjoyed judicial immunity, was it waived to the extent that there was insurance coverage for the liability? The…”
Eklund v. Trost, 2006 MT 333 (Mont. 2006).
· cites it 2× “A “quasi-judicial function” is defined as “an adjudicatory function exercised by an agency, involving the exercise of judgment and discretion in making determinations in controversies.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 2-9-112(1) — 7 cases
Mead v. McKittrick, 727 P.2d 517 (Mont. 1986).
“As such, § 2-9-112, MCA, is not applicable here. The county, as plaintiff's employer should be held accountable for express or implied promises made to plaintiff regarding her employment.”
Silvestrone v. Park Cnty., 2007 MT 261 (Mont. 2007).
“We do not need to determine here if the common law doctrine of judicial 5 immunity also survived Article II, Section 18, as the legislature enacted § 2-9-112, MCA, in 1977 to codify the doctrine of judicial immunity.”
Brunsvold v. State, 820 P.2d 732 (Mont. 1991).
“He named as defendants the State of Montana, the Department of Institutions, Warden Henry Risley of the Montana State Prison and probation officer James Bennett, who *734 incorrectly calculated his good time credits.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 2-9-112(2) — 10 cases
Mead v. McKittrick, 727 P.2d 517 (Mont. 1986).
“As such, § 2-9-112, MCA, is not applicable here. The county, as plaintiff's employer should be held accountable for express or implied promises made to plaintiff regarding her employment.”
Clark v. Dussault, 878 P.2d 239 (Mont. 1994).
“" Section 2-9-112, MCA. We observed that district court judges have the exclusive authority to choose their own secretaries because of the "distinct and unique status" a personal secretary occupies among court employees.”
Hartsoe v. Tucker, 2013 MT 256 (Mont. 2013).
“Judge Christopher agreed that Judge Tucker was immune, and granted Judge Tucker summary dismissal of the action with prejudice. It is from this dismissal that Hartsoe now appeals.”
Brunsvold v. State, 820 P.2d 732 (Mont. 1991).
“He named as defendants the State of Montana, the Department of Institutions, Warden Henry Risley of the Montana State Prison and probation officer James Bennett, who *734 incorrectly calculated his good time credits.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 2-9-112(b) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.