State Ex Rel. Bozeman v. District C ( 1975 )


Menu:
  •                                       No. 12946
    I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O M N A A
    F           F OTN
    1975
    STATE O MONTANA, e x r e l , THE CITY
    F
    OF BOZEMAN and WALTER L. BATES,
    Relators,
    THE DISTRICT COURT O THE EIGHTEENTH
    F
    JUDICIAL DISTRICT O THE STATE O
    F            F
    MONTANA, I N AND FOR THE COUNTY OF
    GALLATIN AND THE HON. 'W. W. LESSLEY,
    JUDGE THEREOF,
    Respondents.
    ORIGINAL PROCEEDING:
    Counsel o f Record:
    For Relators :
    Brown and G i l b e r t , Bozeman, Montana
    Gene I. Brown a r g u e d , Bozeman, Montana
    F o r Respondents :
    Anderson and Dasinger, Bozeman, Montana
    Douglas Dasinger, a r g u e d , Bozeman, Montana
    Submitted:   J a n u a r y 22, 1975
    F-;    .   ,-   ,Y
    ' TS
    Filed:
    Mr. J u s t i c e Frank I . Haswell delivered the Opinion of the Court.
    This i s an o r i g i n a l p r o c e e d i n g by t h e C i t y o f Bozernan
    and i t s employee f o r a writ of s u p e r v i s o r y c o n t r o l .                   They s e e k
    t o r e v e r s e an o r d e r d e n y i n g them summary judgment i n two p e r s o n a l
    i n j u r y a c t i o n s a g a i n s t them i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t of t h e e i g h t e e n t h
    judicial d i s t r i c t .
    R e l a t o r s a r e t h e c i t y of Bozeman and W a l t e r L . B a t e s ,
    i t s employee.           R e s p o n d e n t s a r e t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t and t h e Hon.
    W . W. L e s s l e y , d i s t r i c t j u d g e , p r e s i d i n g .
    The f o l l o w i n g s i t u a t i o n i s d i s c l o s e d by t h e p l e a d i n g s ,
    d e p o s i t i o n s , a n s w e r s t o i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s and a d m i s s i o n s on f i l e
    w i t h the d i s t r i c t court:
    O n A u g u s t 1 7 , 1 9 7 3 , a t a b o u t 5 : 1 5 p.m. I d a Keneady and
    V i r g i n i a No11 were s e a t e d i n K e n e a d y ' s Ford s e d a n p a r k e d a t t h e
    c u r b on Babcock s t r e e t i n Bozeman, Montana.                         The Ford was s t r u c k
    from b e h i n d by a s t r e e t pavement r o l l e r owned by t h e s t a t e o f
    Montana, borrowed by t h e c i t y of Bozeman, and o p e r a t e d by W a l t e r
    L. B a t e s , a c i t y employee.              T h e r e a f t e r , a t t h e scene of t h e
    a c c i d e n t , B a t e s f i l l e d o u t a form g i v i n g h i s name and a d d r e s s
    and I d a Keneady f i l l e d o u t a form g i v i n g h e r name, a d d r e s s , t e l e -
    phone number, and t h e d e t a i l s of t h e a c c i d e n t .                  I t i s unclear
    w h e t h e r V i r g i n i a No11 f i l l e d o u t a s i m i l a r f o r m o r w h e t h e r s h e
    was i n c l u d e d i n t h e form f i l l e d o u t by I d a Keneady.                    The f o r m s
    were e x c h a n g e d by B a t e s and I d a Keneady.                   A policeman a l s o f i l l e d
    o u t an a c c i d e n t r e p o r t ,
    A f t e r r e t u r n i n g home, B a t e s r e p o r t e d t h e a c c i d e n t by
    phone t o t h e foreman o f t h e c i t y s t r e e t d e p a r t m e n t .               The f o l l o w -
    i n g morning t h e a c c i d e n t was r e p o r t e d o r a l l y t o t h e s u p e r i n t e n -
    d e n t of t h e c i t y s t r e e t d e p a r t m e n t and t h e a s s i s t a n t c i t y m a n a g e r .
    The l a t t e r i n turn r e p o r t e d i t t o t h e c i t y ' s i n s u r a n c e company.
    The f o l l o w i n g e v e n i n g , t h e i n s u r a n c e a d j u s t e r c o n t a c t e d b o t h I d a
    K e n e a d y d n d V i r g i n i a iqo11.     He d i s c u s s e d e a c h o f   the claims
    w i t h them;     was a d v i s e d o f t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e a c c i d e n t ;
    t h e n a t u r e a n d e x t e n t o f t h e i r i n j u r i e s s o f a r a s e a c h was
    aware o f a t t h a t t i m e ;        t h e names o f a l l p e r s o n s i n v o l v e d ; a n d
    was a d v i s e d t h a t i t w o u l d be s e v e r a l months b e f o r e t h e e x a c t
    n a t u r e and e x t e n t o f t h e i r c l a i m s c o u l d be p r o p e r l y e v a l u a t e d .
    T h e a d j u s t e r a d v i s e d t h e m t h a t when t h e i r d o c t o r s s u b m i t t e d
    s u f f i c i e n t m e d i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n , t h e i r c l a i m s would be e v a l u a t e d
    a t t h a t time.        Additionally,           a t t h a t time the adjuster attempted
    t o s e t t l e I d a Keneady's c l a i m .
    I d a K e n e a d y a n d V i r g i n i a No11 f i l e d s e p a r a t e p e r s o n a l
    i n j u r y a c t i o n s on A p r i l 8,    1 9 7 4 , a g a i n s t t h e c i t y o f Bozeman,
    B a t e s and t h e s t a t e o f Montana.             S u b s e q u e n t l y summary j u d g m e n t
    was g r a n t e d i n f a v o r o f t h e s t a t e o f M o n t a n a .        The s t a t e i s n o t
    involved i n the present proceeding..
    The p e r s o n a l i n j u r y a c t i o n s were based on t h e a l l e g e d
    negligence o f Bates.                Each c o m p l a i n t c o n t a i n s f o u r c l a i m s f o r
    r e l i e f r e v o l v i n g around t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e Montana T o r t C l a i m s
    Act:
    ( 1 ) Compliance w i t h Act;              (2) estoppel t o r a i s e the pro-
    v i s i o n s o f t h e A c t i n b a r by reason o f t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e i n -
    surance a d j u s t e r ;     (3)    i n a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f the Act t o the c i t y ,
    and ( 4 ) u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f t h e A c t .   We d e c l i n e t o r e a c h t h e
    issues of a p p l i c a b i l i t y o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f the Act as
    summary j u d g m e n t i s p r e c l u d e d i r r e s p e c t i v e o f t h e s e i s s u e s .
    T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d e n i e d m o t i o n s f o r summary j u d g m e n t
    by t h e c i t y a n d B a t e s .      They s u b s e q u e n t l y a p p l i e d t o t h i s C o u r t
    f o r supervisory control t o reverse t h i s r u l i n g .                       We a c c e p t e d
    j u r i s d i c t i o n and i s s u e d a n a l t e r n a t i v e o r d e r t o show c a u s e .        The
    m a t t e r was a r g u e d b y c o u n s e l f o r a l l p a r t i e s a n d t a k e n u n d e r
    ddvisement.
    Ruie , 5 b ( c ) , M.R.Civ . P .       p r o v i d e s t h e moving p a r t i e s , relators
    h e r e , a r e e n t i t l e d t o summary judgment i f :
    " * * * t h e p l e a d i n g s , d e p o s i t i o n s , answers t o
    i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s , and a d m i s s i o n s on f i l e show
    t h a t t h e r e i s no g e n u i n e i s s u e a s t o any m a t e r i a l
    f a c t and t h a t t h e moving p a r t y i s e n t i t l e d t o a
    judgment a s a m a t t e r of l a w . * * * "
    The burden of e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e a b s e n c e of any i s s u e of
    m a t e r i a l f a c t i s o n t h e p a r t y s e e k i n g summary judgment.                  Roope
    v . The Anaconda Co., 159 M o n t . 28, 494 P . 2 d 922; Byrne v . P l a n t e ,
    1 5 
    4 Mont. 6
    , 459 P . 2 d 266, and c a s e s c i t e d t h e r e i n .
    The p e r t i n e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e Montana T o r t Claims
    Act a r e :
    " S e c t i o n 82-4312. * * * All c l a i m s a g a i n s t a
    p o l i t i c a l s u b d i v i s i o n a r i s i n g under t h e p r o v i s i o n s
    of t h i s a c t s h a l l be p r e s e n t e d t o and f i l e d w i t h
    t h e c l e r k o r s e c r e t a r y of t h e p o l i t i c a l s u b d i v i s i o n
    w i t h i n one hundred twenty ( 1 2 0 ) days from t h e d a t e
    of t h e o c c u r r e n c e from which t h e c l a i m a r o s e o r
    when t h e i n j u r y s h o u l d r e a s o n a b l y have been d i s -
    c o v e r e d , whichever i s l a t e r . "
    " S e c t i o n 8 2 - 4 3 1 3 . * * * All c l a i m s p r e s e n t e d t o
    and f i l e d w i t h a governmental e n t i t y s h a l l a c c u r -
    a t e l y d e s c r i b e t h e c o n d u c t and c i r c u m s t a n c e s which
    b r o u g h t a b o u t t h e i n j u r y o r damage, d e s c r i b e t h e
    i n j u r y o r damage, s t a t e t h e time and p l a c e t h e
    i n j u r y o r damage o c c u r r e d , s t a t e t h e names of a l l
    p e r s o n s i n v o l v e d , i f k n o w n , and s h a l l c o n t a i n t h e
    amount of damages c l a i m e d , t o g e t h e r w i t h a s t a t e -
    ment of t h e a c t u a l r e s i d e n c e of t h e c l a i m a n t a t t h e
    t i m e of p r e s e n t i n g and f i l i n g t h e c l a i m and f o r a
    p e r i o d of s i x ( 6 ) months i m m e d i a t e l y p r i o r t o t h e
    t i m e of t h e o c c u r r e n c e from which t h e c l a i m a r o s e .
    I f t h e c l a i m a n t i s i n c a p a c i t a t e d and u n a b l e t o
    p r e s e n t and f i l e h i s c l a i m w i t h i n t h e t i m e p r e -
    s c r i b e d o r i f t h e c l a i m a n t i s a minor o r i f t h e
    c l a i m a n t i s a n o n r e s i d e n t of t h e s t a t e a n d i s a b -
    s e n t d u r i n g t h e t i m e w i t h i n which h i s c l a i m i s
    r e q u i r e d t o be f i l e d , t h e c l a i m may be p r e s e n t e d
    and f i l e d on b e h a l f of t h e c l a i m a n t by any r e l a t i v e ,
    attorney or agent representing the claimant. A
    c l a i m f i l e d under t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h i s s e c t i o n
    s h a l l n o t be h e l d i n v a l i d o r i n s u f f i c i e n t by r e a s o n
    of any i n a c c u r a c y i n s t a t i n g t h e t i m e , p l a c e , n a t u r e
    o r c a u s e of t h e c l a i m , o r o t h e r w i s e , u n l e s s i t i s
    shown t h a t t h e governmental e n t i t y was i n f a c t
    misled t o i t s i n j u r y t h e r e b y . "
    " S e c t i o n 82-4314.      * * *     N c l a i m o r a c t i o n s h a l l be
    o
    a 1 lowed a g a i n s t a governmental e n t i t y u n l e s s t h e
    c l a i m has been p r e s e n t e d and f i l e d w i t h i n t h e t i m e
    1 imi ts prescribed by this act. I t
    Keneady and No11 admit they did not literally comply
    with the provisions of the Montana Tort Claims Act.       At issue
    is whether the relevant facts and circumstances constitute sub-
    stantial compl iance.
    The city concedes actual knowledge of the happening of
    the accident.   Issues of material fact exist concerning the
    fact and extent of actual knowledge by the city that plaintiffs
    were injured and claimed against the city.       The ultimate legal
    issue of substantial compliance turns on these factual issues.
    These issues precluded summary judgment for relators.
    The application for supervisory control is dismissed
    and the stay of proceedings in the district court is vacated.
    ---------  -%-&\
    4-3---
    Justice
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12946

Filed Date: 2/19/1975

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014