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
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/888205/denke-v-shoemaker/ ↗

Full Text

934 chars

¶84 Of course, to be binding a judicial admission must be “an unequivocal statement of fact.” In re Raymond W. George Trust, 1999 MT 223, ¶ 37, 296 Mont. 56, ¶ 37, 986 P.2d 427, ¶ 37. Here, the City asserted in its brief, on more than one occasion, that Shoemaker was acting in his role as a “legislator” or “councilperson” when he wrote the January 2000 letters. The City referred to Shoemaker’s “legislative duty” and “responsibility to his constituency” to provide a forum in which to “examine, debate and even verbally attack” Denke if he disapproved of her job performance. The City characterized Shoemaker’s letter writing as a means to fulfill this *350duty/responsibility. Indeed, the City explicitly argued that “a legislator has both the moral obligation and the legally protected right to take his concerns about a public official to the press after being denied the right to air his concerns during a legislative session.”

Other Sections in This Document (1000)

Full Text