Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Myers v. Thompson

United States District Court, D. Montana, Missoula Division

March 26, 2019

ROBERT MYERS, Plaintiff,
v.
SHAUN R. THOMPSON in his personal capacity, JON G. MOOG (in his personal capacity), MITCHELL D. HILL (in his personal capacity), JEFFREY H. LANGTON, HEATHER L. McGUYER (a/k/a Heather L. Portner and Heather Warila Portner), AMY SCOTT SMITH, and DOES 1-10, Defendants.

          ORDER

          Jeremiah C. Lynch, United States Magistrate Judge.

         Before the Court is Defendants Shaun Thompson, Jon Moog, Mitch Hill, Amy Scott Smith, and Heather McGuyer's motion for an award of attorney's fees incurred defending this action. For the reasons discussed, the Court deems it appropriate to grant the motion.

         I. Background

         The parties are familiar with the extensive details of this case. Thus, for purposes of addressing the pending motion for attorney's fees the Court will present only a general summary of the subject of, and proceedings in this action.

         Myers, appearing pro se, commenced this action stemming from events that occurred in his practice of law as an attorney in Montana, and during a campaign season in which he campaigned for election as a state district court judge in Ravalli County, Montana. During the campaign Myers accused the incumbent district judge, Defendant Jeffrey Langton, of multiple incidents of misconduct.

         Ultimately, as a result of Myers' various activities, the Montana Office of Disciplinary Counsel filed multiple complaints against Myers. Specifically, the complaints were based upon Myers' conduct as an attorney appearing before Langton, and based upon accusations Langton made against Myers for fabricating misinformation about Langton. The various complaints asserted Myers violated provisions of the Montana Rules of Professional Conduct and the Montana Code of Judicial Conduct.

         The Defendants identified in this civil action were each involved with the prosecution of complaints filed against Myers with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. Shaun Thompson served as the Chief Disciplinary Counsel, Jon Moog served as the Deputy Disciplinary Counsel, and Mitchell Hill served as an investigator, all of whom served in the Montana Office of Disciplinary Counsel. Heather McGuyer and Amy Scott Smith were witnesses who the Office of Disciplinary Counsel used in support of its complaints and prosecutions against Myers.

         As a result of the multiple misconduct prosecutions against Myers pursued by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, the Montana Commission on Practice recommended that Myers be disbarred from the practice of law. In 2017 the Montana Supreme Court adopted the recommendation and disbarred Myers.

         In this civil action Myers alleged that Thompson, Moog, Hill, McGuyer and Smith conspired to deliberately fabricate false evidence and testimony against Myers. And Defendants allegedly used that information during the Office of Disciplinary Counsel's prosecution of Myers, and presented the information to the Montana Commission on Practice.

         Additionally, Myers alleged Thompson, Moog, Hill, and McGuyer retaliated against him for the exercise of his free speech rights to publish his accusations against Langton during the campaign. Specifically, Myers' alleged that Defendants' conduct in prosecuting the complaints filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel constituted acts of retaliation against him, all in violation of his rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

         On April 25, 2018, Defendants Thompson, Moog, Hill, Smith and McGuyer moved for summary judgment dismissing Myers' claims against them. Myers did not file a brief in response to Defendant's summary judgment motion.

         On December 13, 2018, the District Court entered its order granting Defendants' summary judgment motion. The Court concluded that Myers' retaliation claims were barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel. (Doc. 43 at 24-25; Doc. 47 at 27-28.) Additionally, the Court concluded Defendants established the absence of a genuine issue of material fact as to the merits of Myers' conspiracy claims, and that Myers failed to submit any evidentiary material to raise a genuine issue of material fact in support of his conspiracy claims. Therefore, the Court dismissed the conspiracy claims. (Doc. 43 at 25-26; Doc. 47 at 28-29.) Finally, the Court concluded Defendants Moog, McGuyer and Smith were also cloaked with immunity from liability on the conspiracy claims under the circumstances of this case. (Doc. 43 at 26-27; Doc. 47 at 29.) Consequently, the Court granted Defendants' summary judgment motion and dismissed this case. (Doc. 47 at 31.)

         Defendants Thompson, Moog, Hill, Smith, and McGuyer now move for an order awarding them the attorney's fees they incurred in defending against of Myers' claims. Although Myers filed a brief in response to Defendants' motion for attorney's fees, he did not present arguments as to the factual and legal merits of Defendants' request for fees. Instead, Myers' response brief consists of 25 pages of arguments challenging the factual and legal merits of Defendants' summary judgment motion which the Court has already resolved.

         II. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.