Difolco v. MT State Hospital

Summary

The Court held that the District Court exceeded its authority under the Montana Administrative Procedure Act by reweighing evidence and rejecting administrative findings supported by substantial evidence. The Court concluded that the Hospital articulated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for hiring Martin and that the evidence did not establish pretext or discriminatory intent. It reversed the District Court, reinstated the Human Rights Commission's decision, and reversed the damages and attorney-fee award.