Victor v. SHEPHERD SCHOOL DISTRICT 37
Montana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Cotter
¶1 Victor and Marilyn Hinkle, individually and on behalf of Rockwell “Rocky” Hinkle, (“Rocky” and “Hinkles”), appeal the District Court’s Order granting summary judgment to Shepherd School District #37, Jim Browning, and James “Shorty” Horn (“Defendants”). While we agree the District Court erred in concluding that Defendants owed no duty to Hinkles, we affirm the summary judgment on the issue of causation.
ISSUES
¶2 1. Did the District Court err when it granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the basis that no duty was owed to Hinkles because the alleged harm was not foreseeable?
¶3…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Mang v. EliassonMontana Supreme Court · 1969
- Lopez v. Great Falls Pre-Release Services, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1999
- LaTray v. City of HavreMontana Supreme Court · 2000
- Nautilus Insurance v. First National InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1992
- Dayberry v. City of East HelenaMontana Supreme Court · 2003
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Fisher v. Swift Transportation Co.Montana Supreme Court · 2008
- Tin Cup County Water v. Garden City Plumbing & Heating, Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 2008
- Faulconbridge v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 2006
- McClue v. Safeco InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 2015
- Beehler v. Eastern Radiological Associates, P.C.Montana Supreme Court · 2012
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.