Motta v. Granite County

Summary

Richard Motta, a Granite County justice of the peace, challenged the reduction of the position's hours and salary, reimbursement determinations, and alleged inadequate clerk funding. The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the District Court's denial of relief, concluding that the clerk issue was moot, reimbursement was governed by statutory rates, and the position had been reduced before Motta's appointment. The Court issued the decision as a noncitable memorandum opinion and declined to consider factual-error claims because Motta had not provided a trial transcript.

Holdings

1. The clerk-funding claim was moot because Motta had a clerk and conceded that the Justice Court was current with its duties.
2. Motta had no legal basis for reimbursement beyond the statutory rates because Montana law limited reimbursement to actual and necessary expenses at the rates provided by statute, and he had been paid those rates.
3. The County Commissioners were statutorily authorized to appoint a replacement justice of the peace and to reduce the position's salary and hours before Motta applied for the position.
4. The Supreme Court would not address claims of factual error when the appellant failed to order or provide a transcript of the trial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Motta's claim concerning the lack of proper funding for a court clerk was moot.
2. Whether Motta was entitled to reimbursement beyond the statutory rates for actual and necessary expenses.
3. Whether the County Commissioners were authorized to reduce the justice of the peace position's hours and salary before Motta applied for or was appointed to the position.
4. Whether the Supreme Court could review alleged factual errors when Motta failed to provide a transcript of the trial.

Disposition

affirmed