Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Massee v. Thompson

Montana Supreme Court

Decided May 5, 2004No. 03-567Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Nelson

specially concurs and dissents.

¶65 I concur in the analysis and in the result of our Opinion with one exception. I disagree with our application of the judicially-created public duty doctrine. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from that portion of our Opinion.

¶66 This case directly raises the question of whether the abolition of sovereign immunity under Article II, Section 18 of the Montana Constitution precludes application of the judicially-created public duty doctrine. We have declined to address this argument in favor of simply applying the public duty doctrine. I would hold that this…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Commercial Carrier Corp. v. Indian River Cty.Supreme Court of Florida · 1979
  2. Coffey v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Fowler v. RobertsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1990
  4. Brennen v. City of EugeneOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Adams v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1976

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API