P was employed at D in Belgrade, Montana, as a photographer/reporter. She left her position on October 19, 1989. After she left allegations were made to the Belgrade Police that P had stolen proof sheets and photographs from D. Dighans, a sergeant with the Belgrade Police Department, was the investigating officer assigned to the case against P brought as result of the allegations. Dighans swore to a complaint before the Belgrade City Judge, alleging that P committed the offense of theft of photographic negatives and proof sheets. These allegations were false. P sued D, and Dighans P claimed that Dighans knew or should have known that the photographs and negatives were owned by P and that there was a lack of probable cause for any criminal prosecution. P alleged that D 'falsely, maliciously, and with the intent of injuring P and her reputation, informed P's employer that P had stolen several photographs from D and that D had provided 'additional false and misleading information to Belgrade City Attorney William Schreiber,' which resulted in the continuation of criminal proceedings against P. The criminal charges filed against P were eventually dismissed because it was subsequently determined that prosecution of the alleged criminal conduct was barred by the statute of limitations. P alleged the following five counts in her complaint: 1. Malicious Prosecution; 2. Defamation 3. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 4. Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress 5. Civil Rights Violation. Motions for summary judgment on all counts of the complaint were filed by Ds. They were eventually granted. P appealed from these orders on May 20, 1994.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.