Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Denke v. Shoemaker, 2008 MT 418 (2008)

Citation
Denke v. Shoemaker, 2008 MT 418 (2008)
Parent Document
Denke v. Shoemaker, 2008 MT 418 (2008)
Jurisdiction
Montana (state)
Effective Date
2008-12-16

Other Sections in This Document (1000)

Full Text

838 chars
¶30 The hearing examiner then considered several affirmative defenses asserted by Shoemaker and the City: privilege under § 27-1-804, MCA; legislative immunity under § 2-9-111, MCA; and the constitutional right to free speech. At the outset, the examiner observed that the significant adverse acts established by Denke consisted of or related to speech. The examiner thus characterized this case as involving a “conflict” between the right to free speech on one hand and the right to be free from illegal retaliation on the other. Noting that “there is little to no current Montana law defining the interaction between the Human Rights Act’s prohibition against retaliation and these affirmative defenses,” the examiner proceeded on the premise that “privileged, immune or constitutionally protected communications cannot be retaliatory.”