Anti-SLAPP protection

Montana does not have an anti-SLAPP law.

Helpful cases

Montana has never had an anti-SLAPP law and no Montana court has referred to a SLAPP in a decision. These cases, however, show how communicators have used requests for summary judgment and a state law in their attempts to fend off lawsuits.

Kurth v. Great Falls Tribune (1996)

A high schooler reported on efforts to construct a grain processing plant for the Great Falls Tribune and inaccurately described Sidney Kurth, a lawyer representing the grain plant, as facing criminal charges. Kurth’s attorneys requested a retraction, bringing the error to the Tribune’s attention. The Tribune printed a retraction, but Kurth sued the newspaper for defamation anyway. In trial, the Tribune filed for summary judgment, concluding Kurth was a public figure. A district court said Kurth became a public figure for a limited purpose concerning the article and granted summary judgment in favor of the Tribune. Kurth appealed and an appellate court determined Kurth was not a public figure, therefore the trial court’s underlying rationale was irrelevant and required a retrial. Subsequently, the district court determined the article had only minimal effect on Kurth’s reputation and awarded him $2,000 in damages.

Hilten v. Bragg (2010)

Eagle Mountain Homeowners Association (EMLA) board of directors member Robert Hilten sued new resident Roy Bragg in 2008 for defamation over several emails through which Bragg expressed discontent with EMLA’s board and practices. After Bragg joined the community subdivision, Hilten and his wife alleged to have endured harassment, a burglary, and a shooting. They believed Bragg was responsible for the crimes. Hilten sought $500,000 in special damages and Bragg moved for summary judgment. Both parties served discovery on one another and consequently Bragg realized Hilten tampered with an audio recording from a prior board meeting. As a result, Bragg filed for motion M. R. Civ. P. 11, which holds a moving party accountable for filing a plea or motion that seeks to harass or needlessly increase the cost of litigation. The court upheld Bragg’s M. R. Civ. P. 11 claim, finding the lawsuit was frivolous and that he was liable for Bragg’s attorney fees. Hilten appealed and an appellate court agreed Hilten’s lawsuit sought to silence Bragg’s opposition to EMLA, awarding Bragg attorney fees.

Roots v. Montana Human Rights Network (1996)

Ultra right-wing political activist Roger Roots sued the Montana Human Rights Network (HMRN) for defamation over a booklet by the nonprofit that described Roots as an organizer for the Klu Klux Klan. A district court considered Roots a public figure because he ran for public office and, as a result, granted HMRN’s request for summary judgment. The court reasoned Roots had not met his burden of proving the booklet was published with actual malice. Roots appealed and the Montana Supreme Court determined the lower court’s application of the state’s summary judgment requirements, which include finding a party has failed to express a “genuine issue of material fact,” was incorrect. The court vacated the summary judgment, reasoning there was sufficient material fact in Roots’ defamation lawsuit.

Legislative activity

No prior legislative effort has been attempted in Montana to pass an anti-SLAPP statute.

Of note

Montana is one of a diminishing number of states with no anti-SLAPP law.