Molina v. Panco Construction Inc.

¶29 I concur with the majority’s conclusion that the District Court erred when it granted Panco Construction, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment. I dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the correct disposition of this case is to remand to the District Court for further consideration of the interrelationship of Rule 4E(2), M.R.Civ.P., § 25-5-103, MCA (the fictitious name statute), and Rule 15(c), M.R.Civ.P.

¶30 The majority correctly states the standard of review of appeals from orders granting summary judgment and then completely ignores it. We have been asked to review, as a matter of…