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

897 chars
¶66 Denke contends that the District Court’s order denying her petition for judicial review is overbroad. The District Court held that the City was not liable for Shoemaker’s letters because he “was not acting within the scope of his duties as a councilperson when he wrote the defamatory letters.” In addition, however, the court also stated that the City “is not liable for Councilman Shoemaker’s letters to the editor, or for comments made by those attending the council meeting because of§ 27-1-804, MCA protecting privileged communication and the Montana Supreme Court case of Skinner vs. Pistoria, 194 Mont. 257, 633 P.2d 672 (1981)” (emphasis added). As Denke correctly points out, this latter rationale not only is beyond the scope of the issues before the District Court, but also amounts to a sua sponte reversal of a final determination concerning Shoemaker’s liability for his letters.