483 P.3d 518
Mont.2021Background
- Kila Shepherd was DOC Human Resources Director; DOC informed her she was being considered for termination on July 23, 2018 and gave a termination letter effective August 10, 2018 that advised filing a grievance under ARM 2.21.8010.
- Shepherd filed a Step III grievance the same day; DOA assigned an OAH hearing officer who held a hearing on January 7, 2019.
- Recommended decision issued February 3, 2020; DOA’s Director issued a Final Administrative Decision adopting it on February 14, 2020 and noted Shepherd could appeal to district court under MAPA.
- Shepherd sued DOC in District Court on March 11, 2020 (26 days after the Final Decision).
- District Court granted summary judgment for DOC, holding Shepherd’s WDEA claim was time‑barred because it exceeded one year plus an interpreted 120‑day tolling limit (and treating procedures as exhausted after 90 days).
- Montana Supreme Court reversed, holding the WDEA tolling provision tolled the statute from initiation of internal procedures until exhaustion (here, the Final Administrative Decision), and rejected the District Court’s reading of the 90/120‑day language.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Shepherd’s WDEA claim was time‑barred under § 39‑2‑911, MCA | Tolling began when she filed the grievance on the date of discharge and continued until the Final Administrative Decision (Feb 14, 2020); suit filed 26 days later was timely | Tolling is limited by statute: procedures are "considered exhausted" after 90 days (allowing filing) and tolling cannot extend beyond 120 days, so Shepherd’s claim exceeded the capped tolling and is untimely | Reversed: tolling runs until the employer’s internal procedures are actually exhausted; the 90‑day filing option is permissive and the 120‑day limitation applies to "provisions of the employer’s internal procedures," not to statutory tolling of procedures generally; Shepherd’s claim was timely |
Key Cases Cited
- Kulm v. Montana State Univ.-Bozeman, 285 Mont. 328, 948 P.2d 243 (1997) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Eldorado Coop. Canal Co. v. Hoge, 383 Mont. 523, 373 P.3d 836 (2016) (statutory interpretation: plain meaning)
- Campanella v. Mont. Dep’t of Transp., 335 Mont. 212, 156 P.3d 1 (2007) (discussing WDEA tolling and the 120‑day extension)
- Turner v. City of Dillon, 399 Mont. 481, 461 P.3d 122 (2020) (affirming timeliness requirement under WDEA)
- Redfern v. Montana Muffler, 271 Mont. 333, 896 P.2d 455 (1995) (one‑year limitations rule under the WDEA)