Court: No immunity for judges in bonds case

A federal judge has rejected the claims of two Bozeman municipal court judges who said a lawsuit brought by a bail bonding company should be dismissed because of judicial immunity.

Meanwhile, the state’s judicial standards commission has dismissed a similar complaint against the two judges, according to a letter from the commission’s chairman.

Bozeman municipal court Judges Karolina Tierney and J. Colleen Herrington told U.S. District Judge Donald W. Molloy that judicial immunity — or the concept that protects individuals or companies from suing judges for doing their jobs — should apply to the ongoing dispute with John J. Looney, Sr., and his company, Bad Boy Bail Bonds.

However, Molloy rejected that argument in a 40-page order filed Monday, saying their actions were outside the scope of a legal case before them, and therefore, judicial immunity does not apply.

The case stems from a dispute stretching back five years to when Bad Boy Bail Bonds was owned by a different company, and posted a bond in Bozeman Municipal Court for a man who later failed to appear. In 2022, Looney bought only the name, not the rest of the company, from a Helena-based bonding service. On Jan. 30, 2024, the court tried to collect the forfeited bond, but Looney told the court and the clerk the bond had been made by another company, and he wasn’t responsible for it.

The municipal court, comprised of Tierney and Herrington, disagreed and suspended his ability to write bonds in Gallatin County.

After his business started collapsing, Looney said he paid the bond so that he could resume issuing bonds, but not before filing a complaint with the state’s judicial standards commission. After paying the bond, Looney assumed that he could resume business, but the court said that it would not consider that until the complaint was withdrawn.

Meanwhile, the Bozeman Municipal Court also filed a complaint against Looney’s company with the Montana Commissioner of Securities and Insurance, which licenses bail bonding companies. It later dismissed the complaint, and no action was ever taken against Bad Boy Bail Bonds or Looney.

That led to Looney filing complaints in the state court as well in federal court, where an injunction by Molloy ordered the court to continue to honor Bad Boy Bail bonds, something that Bozeman-based attorney Matthew Monforton, who represents Looney, said it has since reneged on.

Molloy found that state and federal laws protect judges from being sued if they are acting within the scope of a case or their job. But since Looney had paid the bond, even though he disputed it, and he was licensed by the state, that the judges weren’t covered by judicial immunity for refusing to honor Looney’s bonds. In court, Monforton has argued that Montana law only allows the Commissioner of Securities and Insurance to license and regulate bail bonding companies.

Furthermore, Looney said that he tried repeatedly meeting with the judges to resolve the dispute, but they refused, waiting apparently until he removed the complaint from the state’s judicial standards commission.

Clerk of the Municipal Court Michelle emailed Looney, according to court files:

“The judges are confused as to whether this payment means that the ethics complain filed against Judge Tierney is resolved and will be withdrawn. With the pending complaint and potential litigation you have referenced, the judges would not be able to meet with you to discuss anything that may be handled pursuant to the complaint or pending litigation.”

Looney has said repeatedly that he viewed this as a demand, and replied, “The court’s decision to reinstate my bonding privileges is now being tied to the status of the ethics complaint I filed against Judge Tierney. The implication that my business will continue to face penalties unless I withdraw the ethics complaint is troubling … and gives the appearance that the court is exerting undue pressure on me to withdraw the complaint.”

Court filings show that neither the judges nor the clerk responded to the allegation.

“Bad Boy was apparently in compliance with Montana law and authorized to conduct business as a commercial surety, it was not a normal judicial function to suspend its bonding privileges,” Molloy said.

The judge also found that not only did they attempt to regulate a function that belonged to another branch of government, but when Looney appealed the decision from municipal court, Tierney wiped the appeal from the case file.

While Molloy agreed that judges have the ability to set bonding amounts or requirements, he said they cannot issue “a ban on all bail bonds written by a specific commercial surety company.”

“When the Montana Constitution, state law, and caselaw are read together, Montana law establishes that a judge does not have jurisdiction to suspend a licensed surety’s bonding privileges,” the court order said. “Accordingly judicial immunity is lost.”

Judicial misconduct complaints

The court file confirmed that Looney filed a grievance against both judges with the Montana Judicial Standards Commission, which has the oversight and authority to discipline judges. Those hearings and the decisions, unless forwarded to the Montana Supreme Court, remain confidential.

However, in a Dec. 12, 2024, letter from Judge Mike Menahan, the chairman of the JSC, he told Looney that the three complaints he had lodged had all been dismissed, but the details surrounding the dismissal, including any voting records, remain confidential under state law.