955 N.W.2d 76
N.D.2021Background
- Thompson-Widmer was director of Tri-County Social Services; Larson was her subordinate and then interim director after Thompson-Widmer was placed on administrative leave and resigned.
- Larson filed a formal complaint with the State Board of Social Work Examiners and met with a prosecutor; the complaint and supporting documents were placed in Thompson-Widmer’s Tri-County personnel file while she remained an employee.
- A special prosecutor later suspended the criminal investigation (March 2017) and the State Board issued a letter of concern without formal discipline (June 2017); those exculpatory documents were not added to the personnel file.
- Larson fulfilled open-records requests and provided Thompson-Widmer’s personnel file to Catholic Charities and other potential employers; Thompson-Widmer later lost or failed to obtain certain positions and was terminated by Catholic Charities after the file was released.
- Thompson-Widmer sued for defamation by implication and tortious interference; the district court granted summary judgment for Larson and the counties, finding Larson’s disclosures privileged as official acts and that she was immune as a political-subdivision employee.
- On appeal the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed, holding the communications privileged and Larson immune from liability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sending the personnel file without adding later exculpatory documents amounted to defamation by implication | Thompson-Widmer: omission created the false impression of an open criminal/ethics investigation and was defamatory by implication | Larson/Counties: providing public personnel records in response to open-records requests was an official act and privileged | Court: privileged communication; no defamation liability; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether Larson had a duty to update the personnel file and whether failure to do so defeats statutory immunity | Thompson-Widmer: Larson should have supplemented the file with the prosecutor’s email and Board letter, creating a factual issue | Larson/Counties: no legal duty to update after resignation; statutory immunity applies absent reckless/grossly negligent or willful misconduct | Court: no authority of duty to update and no allegation of reckless/gross negligence; immunity applies |
| Whether tortious interference or punitive damages remain after dismissal of defamation claim | Thompson-Widmer: interference claim and punitive damages proper because disclosures harmed employment opportunities | Larson/Counties: tortious interference depends on underlying wrongful act (defamation); punitive damages barred by immunity and failure to show requisite misconduct | Court: because no liability for defamation and immunity applied, tortious interference and punitive-damages claims fail |
Key Cases Cited
- THR Minerals, LLC v. Robinson, 892 N.W.2d 193 (N.D. 2017) (summary-judgment standard)
- Schmitt v. MeritCare Health Sys., 834 N.W.2d 627 (N.D. 2013) (technically true statements may be defamatory by implication through innuendo)
- Krile v. Lawyer, 947 N.W.2d 366 (N.D. 2020) (privilege protects certain communications as matter of public policy)
- City of Grand Forks v. Grand Forks Herald, Inc., 307 N.W.2d 572 (N.D. 1981) (personnel files of political subdivisions are public records)